ArticleThe plant genome2025
Deep resequencing unveils novel SNPs, InDels, and large structural variants for the clonal fingerprinting of sweet orange [Citrus sinensis (L.) Osbeck].
Article in The plant genome, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Highly heterozygous Citrus changshan-huyou Y. B. Chang originated from ancient hybridization between mandarin and pummelo and displayed distinct tissue-specific allelic imbalance.The plant genome · 2026Article
- Comprehensive transposon-insertion profiling unravels the asexual breeding history of sweet orange cultivars.Plant communications · 2025Article
- Progress in Our Understanding of the Cross-Protection Mechanism of CTV-VT No-SY Isolates Against Homologous SY Isolates.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Deep resequencing unveils novel SNPs, InDels, and large structural variants for the clonal fingerprinting of sweet orange [Citrus sinensis (L.) Osbeck].The plant genome · 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The large phenotypic variability characterizing the sweet orange [Citrus sinensis (L.) Osbeck] germplasm arose from spontaneous somatic mutations and led to the diversification of major groups (common, acidless, Navel, and pigmented). Substantial divergence also occurred within each varietal group. The genetic basis of such variability (i.e., ripening time, fruit shape, color, acidity, and sugar content) is largely uncharacterized, and therefore not exploitable for molecular breeding. Moreover, the clonal nature of all sweet orange accessions hinders the traceability of propagation material and fruit juice using low-density molecular markers. To build a catalog of somatic mutations in Italian varieties, 20 accessions were sequenced at high coverage. This allowed the identification of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), structural variants (SVs), and large hemizygous deletions, specific to clones or varietal groups. A panel of 239 SNPs was successfully used for genotyping 221 sweet orange accessions, allowing them to be clustered into varietal groups. Furthermore, genotyping of SNPs and SVs was extended to leaf and juice samples of commercial varieties belonging to two varietal groups (Moro and Tarocco) collected from 26 sites in Southern Italy, confirming the usefulness of the identified markers for the identification of specific clones. Interestingly, we found that the insertion of the transposable element VANDAL in the gene exons significantly affected the level of allelic-specific expression. Finally, the markers developed in the present work contribute to unraveling the origin and diversification of sweet oranges, representing a reliable and efficient molecular tool for the unambiguous fingerprint of somatic mutants and an asset for the traceability of orange plant material and fruit juice.
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.