ArticlePloS one2025
Investigating adaptation to environmental variability in forest trees through molecular phylogenetic analysis.
Article in PloS one, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We conducted a molecular phylogenetic analysis of the abiotic stress response in 13 key European forest species (Fagus sylvatica L., Quercus robur L., Quercus ilex L., Quercus pubescens Willd., Quercus suber L., Quercus lobata L., Juglans regia L., Populus trichocarpa L., Pinus taeda L., Pinus nigra J.F. Arnold, Pinus pinea L., Pinus pinaster Aiton and Abies alba Mill.) to clarify how different abiotic stressors have influenced their adaptation. The study on the evolution of abiotic stress responses in these species, seeks to uncover the factors driving their distinct evolutionary pathways of adaptation. We created the dataset by collecting data from genomic dataset on genes relevant to the response to abiotic stress in the target species dataset. Then, we used the data in the dataset to search for possible orthologs in the studied species dataset. A matrix was created with sequences of each identified ortho-group, closely related to the analyzed genes, and phylogenetic relationships were reconstructed using the maximum likelihood (ML) method. Pairwise estimates of synonymous and nonsynonymous substitutions per site (Ks and Ka, respectively) were calculated using the ML method. Analysis of 616 genes associated with abiotic stress response revealed 347 genes in angiosperms species, with F. sylvatica having the highest count, and 269 genes in conifers, where A. alba contributing the most. Drought stress exhibited the highest number of shared genes, while freezing stress showed the least. Substitution rate analysis indicated higher average values in angiosperms species, with a stronger signature of adaptive evolution in conifers, as suggested by the higher Ka/Ks ratio. The study unveils distinctive patterns in the evolutionary dynamics of molecular responses to abiotic stresses between the 13 key forest tree species. Lower substitution rates in conifers suggest unique constraints, likely influenced by larger genomes and ancient lineage divergence. The prevalence of Ka/Ks values below unity emphasizes strong selective constraints, highlighting the conservation of abiotic stress response mechanisms across diverse lineages.
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.