ArticlePlant diversity2025
Evaluating the utility of deep genome skimming for phylogenomic analyses: A case study in the species-rich genus
Article in Plant diversity, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Simultaneous Inference of Flora-Wide Nuclear and Plastid Phylogenies Using Angiosperms353 Sequence Capture Data.Molecular ecology resources · 2026Article
- A dataset of 352 nuclear genes for accurate species identification and geographical origin traceability ofData in brief · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Deep genome skimming (DGS) has emerged as a promising approach to recover orthologous nuclear genes for large-scale phylogenomic analyses. However, its reliability with low DNA quality and quantity typical of archival specimens, such as herbarium material, remains largely unexplored. We used
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.