ArticleScientific reports2025
Comparative and phylogenetic analyses of the chloroplast genomes of mangrove plants.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The complete chloroplast genome ofMitochondrial DNA. Part B, Resources · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mangrove ecosystems play a crucial role in coastal environment by stabilizing shorelines, reducing erosion, and providing habitat for diverse wildlife. However, there are fewer studies on the genetic management of mangrove plants. In this study, the chloroplast genome of Hibiscus tiliaceus L. was obtained through whole genome resequencing. The complete chloroplast genome of this species was 161,764 bp in length and comprised 84 protein-coding genes, eight rRNA (ribosomal RNA) genes, 37 tRNA (transfer RNA) genes. We conducted a comparative analysis of the chloroplast genomes of 26 mangrove species and found the conservation of genome structure among these mangrove plants, including the number of protein-coding genes, rRNA genes, and tRNA genes. However, there were noticeable differences in the number of SSRs (simple sequence repeats), the number of repeat sequences, and the borders of the IR (inverted repeat) regions, indicating genetic differentiation among mangrove plants. Besides, we found special differences in the distribution of certain genes in chloroplast genomes of certain species. Moreover, phylogenetic analysis based on chloroplast genome data clearly revealed that neither true mangrove plants nor semi-mangrove plants were monophyletic. These results revealed that chloroplast genomes will be useful to help understand the genetic differentiation and phylogenetic relationships of mangrove plants, which could assist in the genetic management, conservation, and restoration of mangrove ecosystems.
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.