Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38382084›Full record

ReviewThe Plant cell2024

Genome organization and botanical diversity.

Andrew H Paterson, Christine Queitsch

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Plant cell, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Genome-Wide Identification of theInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

2 authors.

Andrew H PatersonPlant Genome Mapping Laboratory, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2159-0487
Christine QueitschDepartment of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0905-4705

Funding

STABILITY OF PROTEINS IN NONAQUEOUS SOLVENTSF32GM013953 · NIGMS · CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI ROBINSON, AMY C · 1990 to 1990
–
NIH HHS 1R35GM13953
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The rich diversity of angiosperms, both the planet's dominant flora and the cornerstone of agriculture, is integrally intertwined with a distinctive evolutionary history. Here, we explore the interplay between angiosperm genome organization and botanical diversity, empowered by genomic approaches ranging from genetic linkage mapping to analysis of gene regulation. Commonality in the genetic hardware of plants has enabled robust comparative genomics that has provided a broad picture of angiosperm evolution and implicated both general processes and specific elements in contributing to botanical diversity. We argue that the hardware of plant genomes-both in content and in dynamics-has been shaped by selection for rather substantial differences in gene regulation between plants and animals such as maize and human, organisms of comparable genome size and gene number. Their distinctive genome content and dynamics may reflect in part the indeterminate development of plants that puts strikingly different demands on gene regulation than in animals. Repeated polyploidization of plant genomes and multiplication of individual genes together with extensive rearrangement and differential retention provide rich raw material for selection of morphological and/or physiological variations conferring fitness in specific niches, whether natural or artificial. These findings exemplify the burgeoning information available to employ in increasing knowledge of plant biology and in modifying selected plants to better meet human needs.

Indexed as

Genome, PlantMagnoliopsidaEvolution, MolecularGene Expression Regulation, PlantGenetic VariationGenomicsPolyploidy

Identifiers

PMID38382084
PMCPMC11062460

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.