ArticleHorticulture research2025
Citrus genomes: past, present and future.
Article in Horticulture research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diversity parameter calculation from SSR data with varying and higher ploidy levels: an example on pear (Pyrus ssp.) data.BMC research notes · 2026Article
- Haplotype-resolved telomere-to-telomere assembly and haplotype-aware annotation pipeline enable high-quality reannotation of threeHorticulture research · 2026Article
- Haplotype-resolved genome of Citrus × sinensis 'Pera IAC', the most widely cultivated sweet orange in Brazil.Scientific data · 2026Article
- Pangenomic Approach for the Identification and Functional Characterization of Active GASA Antimicrobial Genes in Citrus Rootstocks for Resistance Breeding Against Bacterial Pathogens.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Diploid assembly of the Mexican lime genome.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Over the past decade, genome sequencing and assembly approaches have been greatly improved, resulting in the assembly of many genomes for citrus, including wild, domesticated, and citrus-related genomes. Improvements in technologies have led to assembled genomes with higher completeness, contiguity, quality, and accuracy that have greatly facilitated annotation and analysis. This review summarizes the evolution of the sequencing, assembly, and annotation technologies leading to citrus genomes over the past 11 years, a comprehensive evaluation of their quality, contiguity, and completeness, and the major findings and applications. Of the 50 genomes now available, 35 have been assembled to chromosome level and 15 to draft level, and 14 were haplotype-resolved assemblies. To date there have been four pangenome-wide studies for citrus. The very recent genomes assembled with long-read sequencing have achieved >99% and >98% assembly and annotation completeness (BUSCO), respectively. However, some early genomes are not of the same high quality as more recently sequenced genomes and would benefit from re-sequencing. A more comprehensive pangenome based upon a larger set of species and genotypes assembled at the haplotype level would allow genomics to deliver the maximum benefits for citrus improvement and research.
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.