Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,053

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Plant DNA Flow Cytometry and Estimation of Nuclear Genome Size

Open access
DOLEZEL, J.·2005·Annals of Botany

Abstract

BACKGROUND: DNA flow cytometry describes the use of flow cytometry for estimation of DNA quantity in cell nuclei. The method involves preparation of aqueous suspensions of intact nuclei whose DNA is stained using a DNA fluorochrome. The nuclei are classified according to their relative fluorescence intensity or DNA content. Because the sample preparation and analysis is convenient and rapid, DNA flow cytometry has become a popular method for ploidy screening, detection of mixoploidy and aneuploidy, cell cycle analysis, assessment of the degree of polysomaty, determination of reproductive pathway, and estimation of absolute DNA amount or genome size. While the former applications are relatively straightforward, estimation of absolute DNA amount requires special attention to possible errors in sample preparation and analysis. SCOPE: The article reviews current procedures for estimation of absolute DNA amounts in plants using flow cytometry, with special emphasis on preparation of nuclei suspensions, stoichiometric DNA staining and the use of DNA reference standards. In addition, methodological pitfalls encountered in estimation of intraspecific variation in genome size are discussed as well as problems linked to the use of DNA flow cytometry for fieldwork. CONCLUSIONS: Reliable estimation of absolute DNA amounts in plants using flow cytometry is not a trivial task. Although several well-proven protocols are available and some factors controlling the precision and reproducibility have been identified, several problems persist: (1) the need for fresh tissues complicates the transfer of samples from field to the laboratory and/or their storage; (2) the role of cytosolic compounds interfering with quantitative DNA staining is not well understood; and (3) the use of a set of internationally agreed DNA reference standards still remains an unrealized goal.

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 · 10.1093/aob/mci005

Cites

1 of 1 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

Cited by

See all 1,053

Metadata

Authors
DOLEZEL, J.
Venue
Annals of Botany
Published
2005-01-01
Volume
95
Issue
1
Pages
99-110
ISSN
  • 0305-7364 (ISSN-L)
  • 1095-8290
OpenAlex
W1994300565
Cited by
1,053
References
1
FWCI
25.12
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: Plant DNA Flow Cytometry and Estimation of Nuclear Genome Size. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/aob/mci005
The paper
DOLEZEL, J. (2005). Plant DNA Flow Cytometry and Estimation of Nuclear Genome Size. Annals of Botany. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mci005

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.