The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Inheritance of the morphological differences between maize and teosinte: comparison of results for two F2 populations.
Open accessAbstract
Molecular marker loci (MMLs) were employed to map quantitative trait loci (QTLs) in an F2 population derived from a cross of maize (Zea mays ssp. mays) and its probable progenitor, teosinte (Z. mays ssp. parviglumis). A total of 50 significant associations (putative QTLs) between the MMLs and nine key traits that distinguish maize and teosinte were identified. Results from this analysis are compared with our previous analysis of an F2 population derived from a cross of a different variety of maize and another subspecies of teosinte (Z. mays ssp. mexicana). For traits that measure the architectural differences between maize and teosinte, the two F2 populations possessed similar suites of QTLs. For traits that measure components of yield, substantially different suites of QTLs were identified in the two populations. QTLs that control about 20% or more of the phenotypic variance for a trait in one population were detected in the other population 81% of the time, while QTLs that control less than 10% of the variance in one population were detected in the other population only 28% of the time. In our previously published analysis of the maize x ssp. mexicana population, we identified five regions of the genome that control most of the key morphological differences between maize and teosinte. These same five regions also control most of the differences in the maize x ssp. parviglumis population. Results from both populations support the hypothesis that a relatively small number of loci with large effects were involved in the early evolution of the key traits that distinguish maize and teosinte. It is suggested that loci with large effects on morphology may not be a specific feature of crop evolution, but rather a common phenomenon in plant evolution whenever a species invades a new niche with reduced competition.
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
Cited by
The evolution of apical dominance in maize
Doebley, J., Stec, A., & Hubbard, L. (1997) · Nature · doi:10.1038/386485a0 · Cited by 1,552
Self-citationThe Genetic Architecture of Quantitative Traits
Mackay, T. F. C. (2001) · Annual Review of Genetics · doi:10.1146/annurev.genet.35.102401.090633 · Cited by 1,106
PERSPECTIVE: EVOLUTIONARY DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY AND THE PROBLEM OF VARIATION
Stern, D. L. (2000) · Evolution · doi:10.1111/j.0014-3820.2000.tb00544.x · Cited by 483
grassy tillers1 promotes apical dominance in maize and responds to shade signals in the grasses
Whipple, C. J., Kebrom, T. H., Weber, A. L., Yang, F., Hall, D., Meeley, R., Schmidt, R., Doebley, J., Brutnell, T. P., & Jackson, D. P. (2011) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1102819108 · Cited by 240
Self-citationSomething on the Side: Axillary Meristems and Plant Development
Bennett, T., & Leyser, O. (2006) · Plant Molecular Biology · doi:10.1007/s11103-005-2763-4 · Cited by 131
Metadata
- Authors
- Doebley, J., & Stec, A.
- Venue
- Genetics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1993-06-01
- Volume
- 134
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 559-570
- ISSN
- 0016-6731 (ISSN-L)
- 1943-2631
- OpenAlex
- W2137728535
- Cited by
- 321
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 7.28
- 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: Inheritance of the morphological differences between maize and teosinte: comparison of results for two F2 populations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/genetics/134.2.559
- The paper
- Doebley, J., & Stec, A. (1993). Inheritance of the morphological differences between maize and teosinte: comparison of results for two F2 populations. Genetics. https://doi.org/10.1093/genetics/134.2.559
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.