2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.ympev.2015.06.013
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The chloroplast genome of the hexaploid Spartina maritima (Poaceae, Chloridoideae): Comparative analyses and molecular dating

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

10
54
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 65 publications
(67 citation statements)
references
References 88 publications
10
54
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The de novo assembly was performed using Velvet version 1.2.10 [11] with the following settings: k = 151, scaffolding = no, exp_cov = auto, -cov_cutoff = 10, -max_coverage = 500, and -min_contig_lgth = 2000. All resulting contigs were used as the query to run TBLASTX [12, 13] searches against the complete chloroplast genome of Spartina maritima [14] with the following cutoff: e-value = 10 −15 and sequence identity = 0.8. A total of 15 putative chloroplast contigs were identified and used as the first version of the draft assembly for further improvement until the complete chloroplast genome sequence was obtained.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The de novo assembly was performed using Velvet version 1.2.10 [11] with the following settings: k = 151, scaffolding = no, exp_cov = auto, -cov_cutoff = 10, -max_coverage = 500, and -min_contig_lgth = 2000. All resulting contigs were used as the query to run TBLASTX [12, 13] searches against the complete chloroplast genome of Spartina maritima [14] with the following cutoff: e-value = 10 −15 and sequence identity = 0.8. A total of 15 putative chloroplast contigs were identified and used as the first version of the draft assembly for further improvement until the complete chloroplast genome sequence was obtained.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To improve the assembly, the complete chloroplast genome of Spartina maritima [14] was used as a guide for scaffolding. In each round of our iterative process, all Illumina raw reads were mapped to the draft assembly using BWA version 0.7.12 [15], programmatically checked using the MPILEUP program in SAMTOOLS package version 1.2 [16], and visually inspected using IGV version 2.3.41 [17].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While these findings show novel patterns of response to hydrocarbon stress, and our experimental results support a role for SUVH5 and ATTPS21 in regulating the response to crude oil, the divergence between S. alterniflora, B. distachyon and A. thaliana limits the conclusions that we can draw. The Spartina genus (Chloridoideae subfamily) diverged from Brachypodium (Pooideae subfamily) more than 40 Ma (Rousseau-Gueutin et al, 2015) and from Arabidopsis 150 Ma (Kumar, Stecher, Suleski, & Hedges, 2017). During that time, the Spartina genus has undergone several hybridization and polyploidization events (Ainouche, Baumel, Salmon, & Yannic, 2003) that have increased chromosome number and ploidy level from 2n = 4x = 40 (tetraploid) to 2n = 12x = 120-124 (dodecaploid).…”
Section: Conclusion Smentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This proposal, however, presents major disadvantages including not only the creation of an extremely large genus that encompasses highly divergent clades (e.g., Spartina diverged from its sister clade sometimes 12–20 million years ago; Rousseau‐Gueutin et al. ), but also overlooking the long and well‐rooted history of scientific, cultural and socioeconomic relevance implicit in the name Spartina . The important criterion for rejection or conservation of botanical names is to avoid “disadvantageous nomenclatural changes” (McNeill et al.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The authors argued that conserving the name Sporobolus would avoid taxonomic destabilization, noting that shifting all names to the senior name Spartina would necessitate many new binomial combinations and heterotypic synonyms. This proposal, however, presents major disadvantages including not only the creation of an extremely large genus that encompasses highly divergent clades (e.g., Spartina diverged from its sister clade sometimes 12-20 million years ago; Rousseau-Gueutin et al 2015), but also overlooking the long and well-rooted history of scientific, cultural and socioeconomic relevance implicit in the name Spartina. The important criterion for rejection or conservation of botanical names is to avoid Article e02863; page 2 ALEJANDRO BORTOLUS ET AL.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%