Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37797054›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Untangling the hedge: Genetic diversity in clonally and sexually transmitted genomes of European wild roses, Rosa L.

Katja Reichel, Veit Herklotz, Alisia Smolka, Hilde Nybom, Alexandra Kellner, Jan De Riek, Marinus J M Smulders, Volker Wissemann, Christiane M Ritz

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.

Katja ReichelInstitute of Biology, Dahlem Center of Plant Sciences, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-9052-3179
Veit HerklotzDepartment of Botany, Senckenberg Museum for Natural History Görlitz, Senckenberg-Member of the Leibniz Association, Görlitz, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-4335-0193
Alisia SmolkaInstitute of Biology, Dahlem Center of Plant Sciences, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Hilde NybomDepartment of Plant Breeding, Balsgård, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Kristianstad, Sweden.
Alexandra KellnerInstitute of Botany, Systematic Botany Group, Justus-Liebig-University, Gießen, Germany.
Jan De RiekFlanders Research Institute for Agricultural, Fisheries and Food Research (ILVO), Plant Sciences Unit, Melle, Belgium.
Marinus J M SmuldersPlant Breeding, Wageningen University & Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-8549-6046
Volker WissemannInstitute of Botany, Systematic Botany Group, Justus-Liebig-University, Gießen, Germany.
Christiane M RitzDepartment of Botany, Senckenberg Museum for Natural History Görlitz, Senckenberg-Member of the Leibniz Association, Görlitz, Germany.
Senckenberg Museum für Naturkunde Görlitz · DEJustus-Liebig-Universität Gießen · DEFreie Universität Berlin · DESwedish University of Agricultural Sciences · SEVlaams Instituut voor Biotechnologie · BEWageningen University & Research · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While European wild roses are abundant and widely distributed, their morphological taxonomy is complicated and ambiguous. In particular, the polyploid Rosa section Caninae (dogroses) is characterised by its unusual meiosis, causing simultaneous clonal and sexual transmission of sub-genomes. This hemisexual reproduction, which often co-occurs with vegetative reproduction, defies the standard definition of species boundaries. We analysed seven highly polymorphic microsatellite loci, scored for over 2 600 Rosa samples of differing ploidy, collected across Europe within three independent research projects. Based on their morphology, these samples had been identified as belonging to 21 dogrose and five other native rose species. We quantified the degree of clonality within species and at individual sampling sites. We then compared the genetic structure within our data to current rose morpho-systematics and searched for hemisexually co-inherited sets of alleles at individual loci. We found considerably fewer copies of identical multi-locus genotypes in dogroses than in roses with regular meiosis, with some variation recorded among species. While clonality showed no detectable geographic pattern, some genotypes appeared to be more widespread. Microsatellite data confirmed the current classification of subsections, but they did not support most of the generally accepted dogrose microspecies. Under canina meiosis, we found co-inherited sets of alleles as expected, but could not distinguish between sexually and clonally inherited sub-genomes, with only some of the detected allele combinations being lineage-specific.

Indexed as

RosaEuropeGenetic VariationGenome, PlantPloidiesPolyploidy

Identifiers

PMID37797054
PMCPMC10553836
OpenAlexW4387362279

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.