ArticleBMC plant biology2025
Genomic DNA barcodes provide novel insights into species delimitation in the complex Camellia sect. Thea (Theaceae).
Article in BMC plant biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Morphological and Chemical Characterization of a Novel Wild Tea Plant Resource with Naturally Low Caffeine and High Theobromine from Guangxi Province, China.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- ddRAD sequencing of 1076Plant diversity · 2026Article
- DNA barcodes analyses provide insights into species delineation and possible cryptic species in Amentotaxus (Taxaceae).BMC plant biology · 2026Article
- The complete chloroplast genome sequence ofMitochondrial DNA. Part B, Resources · 2026Article
- Typification and new synonyms of tea (PhytoKeys · 2026Article
- Article
- Comparative plastome analyses and evolutionary relationships ofFrontiers in plant science · 2025Article
- Determining the influence of tree age on tea quality-related metabolites inFrontiers in plant science · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSpecies delimitation within Camellia sect. Thea is taxonomically challenging due to its complex evolutionary history. This study aims to utilize nuclear and chloroplast data as genomic DNA barcodes to delimit species within this economically important group of plants.
resultsWhole genome sequencing (WGS) data were obtained for 98 accessions representing all but one species in C. sect. Thea. Based on 759 high-quality SCNs, 98 whole chloroplast genomes, and by using 2× coverage clean reads from WGS for Skmer analyses, we found that combining the findings from these three data sets resulted in nearly complete species delimitation and resolution of all interspecific relationships within C. sect. Thea. We also found support for the taxonomic elevation of two varieties (C. sinensis var. assamica and C. tachangensis var. remotiserrata) to species status (C. assamica and C. remotiserrata, respectively). Furthermore, we confirmed that C. formosensis represents a distinct species. Gene tree discordances, chloroplast-nuclear conflicts and complex network-like phylogenetic relationships were observed in C. sect. Thea.
conclusionCompared with the use of single parentally inherited chloroplast data sources, utilizing both uniparentally inherited chloroplast data and biparentally inherited nuclear data improved the species delimitation of taxa within C. sect. Thea. The intricate phylogenetic relationships observed are likely a result of widespread past hybridization and chloroplast capture events among species within this group, which may have blurred the species boundaries. Our novel approach to species delimitation within C. sect. Thea may serve as a blueprint for employing genomic DNA barcodes in other taxa with complex histories, and will significantly contribute to the conservation of cultivated tea plant species and their wild relatives.
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.