The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparative genomics of Physcomitrella patens gametophytic transcriptome and Arabidopsis thaliana: Implication for land plant evolution
Open accessAbstract
The mosses and flowering plants diverged >400 million years ago. The mosses have haploid-dominant life cycles, whereas the flowering plants are diploid-dominant. The common ancestors of land plants have been inferred to be haploid-dominant, suggesting that genes used in the diploid body of flowering plants were recruited from the genes used in the haploid body of the ancestors during the evolution of land plants. To assess this evolutionary hypothesis, we constructed an EST library of the moss Physcomitrella patens, and compared the moss transcriptome to the genome of Arabidopsis thaliana. We constructed full-length enriched cDNA libraries from auxin-treated, cytokinin-treated, and untreated gametophytes of P. patens, and sequenced both ends of >40,000 clones. These data, together with the mRNA sequences in the public databases, were assembled into 15,883 putative transcripts. Sequence comparisons of A. thaliana and P. patens showed that at least 66% of the A. thaliana genes had homologues in P. patens. Comparison of the P. patens putative transcripts with all known proteins, revealed 9,907 putative transcripts with high levels of similarity to vascular plant genes, and 850 putative transcripts with high levels of similarity to other organisms. The haploid transcriptome of P. patens appears to be quite similar to the A. thaliana genome, supporting the evolutionary hypothesis. Our study also revealed that a number of genes are moss specific and were lost in the flowering plant lineage.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Gene Ontology: tool for the unification of biology
Ashburner, M., Ball, C. A., Blake, J. A., Botstein, D., Butler, H., Cherry, J. M., Davis, A. P., Dolinski, K., Dwight, S. S., Eppig, J. T., et al. (2000) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/75556 · Cited by 43,206
Analysis of the genome sequence of the flowering plant Arabidopsis thaliana
Initiative, T. A. G. (2000) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35048692 · Cited by 9,301
Base-Calling of Automated Sequencer Traces Using Phred. II. Error Probabilities
Ewing, B., & Green, P. (1998) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.8.3.186 · Cited by 5,439
CAP3: A DNA Sequence Assembly Program
Huang, X., & Madan, A. (1999) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.9.9.868 · Cited by 5,261
Cited by
Genome-Wide Analysis of the GRAS Gene Family in Rice and Arabidopsis
Tian, C., Wan, P., Sun, S., Li, J., & Chen, M. (2004) · Plant Molecular Biology · doi:10.1023/b:plan.0000038256.89809.57 · Cited by 406
Metadata
- Authors
- Nishiyama, T., Fujita, T., Shin-I, T., Seki, M., Nishide, H., Uchiyama, I., Kamiya, A., Carninci, P., Hayashizaki, Y., Shinozaki, K., Kohara, Y., & Hasebe, M.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 2003-06-13
- Volume
- 100
- Issue
- 13
- Pages
- 8007-8012
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- OpenAlex
- W1968782697
- Cited by
- 353
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 42.12
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparative genomics of Physcomitrella patens gametophytic transcriptome and Arabidopsis thaliana: Implication for land plant evolution. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.0932694100
- The paper
- Nishiyama, T., Fujita, T., Shin-I, T., Seki, M., Nishide, H., Uchiyama, I., Kamiya, A., Carninci, P., Hayashizaki, Y., Shinozaki, K., Kohara, Y., & Hasebe, M. (2003). Comparative genomics of Physcomitrella patens gametophytic transcriptome and Arabidopsis thaliana: Implication for land plant evolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0932694100
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.