ArticleForestry research2021
Comprehensive identification and characterization of simple sequence repeats based on the whole-genome sequences of 14 forest and fruit trees.
Article in Forestry research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- SSR marker development for analysis of the genetic diversity and identification of species and infraspecific ranks in the genus Phyllostachys.BMC plant biology · 2026Article
- Genome-Wide Characterization and Development of Simple Sequence Repeat Markers for Molecular Diversity Analyses in Yellowhorn (Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Establishment of Novel Simple Sequence Repeat (SSR) Markers fromPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- The high-quality sequencing of theHorticulture research · 2023Article
- Genome-wide characterization and identification of Trihelix transcription factors and expression profiling in response to abiotic stresses in Chinese Willow (Frontiers in plant science · 2023Article
- Genome-wide survey and characterization of microsatellites in cashew and design of a web-based microsatellite database: CMDB.Frontiers in plant science · 2023Article
- High-quality ice plant reference genome analysis provides insights into genome evolution and allows exploration of genes involved in the transition from C3 to CAM pathways.Plant biotechnology journal · 2022Article
- Genetic Diversity and Population Structure of an Arctic Tertiary Relict Tree Endemic to China (Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Article
- TVIR: a comprehensive vegetable information resource database for comparative and functional genomic studies.Horticulture research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Simple sequence repeats (SSRs) are popular and important molecular markers that exist widely in plants. Here, we conducted a comprehensive identification and comparative analysis of SSRs in 14 tree species. A total of 16, 298 SSRs were identified from 429, 449 genes, and primers were successfully designed for 99.44% of the identified SSRs. Our analysis indicated that tri-nucleotide SSRs were the most abundant, with an average of ~834 per species. Functional enrichment analysis by combining SSR-containing genes in all species, revealed 50 significantly enriched terms, with most belonging to transcription factor families associated with plant development and abiotic stresses such as Myeloblastosis_DNA-bind_4 (Myb_DNA-bind_4), APETALA2 (AP2), and Fantastic Four meristem regulator (FAF). Further functional enrichment analysis showed that 48 terms related to abiotic stress regulation and floral development were significantly enriched in ten species, whereas no significantly enriched terms were found in four species. Interestingly, the largest number of enriched terms was detected in
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.