Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 540

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Uncovering hidden variation in polyploid wheat

Open access
Krasileva, Ksenia V., Vasquez-Gross, Hans A., Howell, Tyson, Bailey, Paul, Paraiso, Francine, Clissold, Leah, Simmonds, James, Ramirez-Gonzalez, Ricardo H., Wang, Xiaodong, Borrill, Philippa, Fosker, Christine, Ayling, Sarah, Phillips, Andrew L., Uauy, Cristobal, Dubcovsky, Jorge·2017·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Comprehensive reverse genetic resources, which have been key to understanding gene function in diploid model organisms, are missing in many polyploid crops. Young polyploid species such as wheat, which was domesticated less than 10,000 y ago, have high levels of sequence identity among subgenomes that mask the effects of recessive alleles. Such redundancy reduces the probability of selection of favorable mutations during natural or human selection, but also allows wheat to tolerate high densities of induced mutations. Here we exploited this property to sequence and catalog more than 10 million mutations in the protein-coding regions of 2,735 mutant lines of tetraploid and hexaploid wheat. We detected, on average, 2,705 and 5,351 mutations per tetraploid and hexaploid line, respectively, which resulted in 35–40 mutations per kb in each population. With these mutation densities, we identified an average of 23–24 missense and truncation alleles per gene, with at least one truncation or deleterious missense mutation in more than 90% of the captured wheat genes per population. This public collection of mutant seed stocks and sequence data enables rapid identification of mutations in the different copies of the wheat genes, which can be combined to uncover previously hidden variation. Polyploidy is a central phenomenon in plant evolution, and many crop species have undergone recent genome duplication events. Therefore, the general strategy and methods developed herein can benefit other polyploid crops.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.1619268114

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 6 references

Cited by

See all 540

Metadata

Authors
Krasileva, K. V., Vasquez-Gross, H. A., Howell, T., Bailey, P., Paraiso, F., Clissold, L., Simmonds, J., Ramirez-Gonzalez, R. H., Wang, X., Borrill, P., Fosker, C., Ayling, S., Phillips, A. L., Uauy, C., & Dubcovsky, J.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2017-01-17
Volume
114
Issue
6
Pages
E913-E921
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2572395344
Cited by
540
References
6
FWCI
51.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Uncovering hidden variation in polyploid wheat. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.1619268114
The paper
Krasileva, K. V., Vasquez-Gross, H. A., Howell, T., Bailey, P., Paraiso, F., Clissold, L., Simmonds, J., Ramirez-Gonzalez, R. H., Wang, X., Borrill, P., Fosker, C., Ayling, S., Phillips, A. L., Uauy, C., & Dubcovsky, J. (2017). Uncovering hidden variation in polyploid wheat. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1619268114

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.