ArticleBMC genomics2025
Complete chloroplast genome of two Brachycorythis (Orchidaceae) species from China: comparative analysis and phylogenetic implications.
Article in BMC genomics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBrachycorythis Lindl. (Orchidinae, Orchidaceae) was characterized by a large and densely leafy stem throughout its length, comprising about 35 species with African-Asian disjunct distribution. However, the intergeneric and infrageneric phylogeny of Brachycorythis has been debated based on morphological and molecular data. The chloroplast (cp.) genomes of B. henryi and B. menglianensis were investigated in detail and compared with those of related taxa for providing new evidence for the phylogenetics of Brachycorythis.
resultsThe cp. genomes of B. henryi and B. menglianensis exhibited conserved quadripartite structures, measured 153,006 bp and 152,932 bp in length, with an identical GC content of 37.2%. Gene annotations identified 133 genes, 20 duplicated in the inverted repeat regions. Comparative analysis across their related species confirmed stable sequence identity and higher variation in single-copy regions. Phylogenetic analysis based on complete cp. genomic data revealed that these two Brachycorythis species formed an independent clade exhibiting distinct branch lengths, representing a sister lineage to their related taxa in Orchidinae s. s. It was also supported that six species of Brachycorythis formed a monophyletic clade based on matK + rbcL sequences. Among them, three species from Asia and other three species from Africa, respectively, formed two independent clades. Notably, it was also showed that B. macowaniana was not clustered with other six Brachycorythis species.
conclusionsThis is the first report on complete cp. genomic data of Brachycorythis, providing some phylogenetic implications. Some varied cp. genomic features for phylogenetic implications were discussed, including overall genome structure, codon usage, repeat sequences, IR boundaries, DNA polymorphisms, and phylogenetic reconstruction. Based on chloroplast genomic data and matK + rbcL sequence analysis, phylogenetic results revealed that Brachycorythis was not closely related to any of the five genera assumed to be related. Three species from Asia and other three species from Africa, respectively, formed two independent clades, which was consistent well with the African-Asian disjunct distribution of Brachycorythis. And, it was supported that Gyaladenia should be re-established, considering the uncertain species of B. macowaniana. In addition, it was revealed that B. menglianensis was not a synonym of B. henryi, and each of them was a distinct species based on cp. genomic and morphological data. Therefore, the intergeneric and infrageneric relationship of Brachycorythis should be understood better by more cp. genomic data.
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.