The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Deductions about the Number, Organization, and Evolution of Genes in the Tomato Genome Based on Analysis of a Large Expressed Sequence Tag Collection and Selective Genomic Sequencing
Open accessAbstract
Analysis of a collection of 120,892 single-pass ESTs, derived from 26 different tomato cDNA libraries and reduced to a set of 27,274 unique consensus sequences (unigenes), revealed that 70% of the unigenes have identifiable homologs in the Arabidopsis genome. Genes corresponding to metabolism have remained most conserved between these two genomes, whereas genes encoding transcription factors are among the fastest evolving. The majority of the 10 largest conserved multigene families share similar copy numbers in tomato and Arabidopsis, suggesting that the multiplicity of these families may have occurred before the divergence of these two species. An exception to this multigene conservation was observed for the E8-like protein family, which is associated with fruit ripening and has higher copy number in tomato than in Arabidopsis. Finally, six BAC clones from different parts of the tomato genome were isolated, genetically mapped, sequenced, and annotated. The combined analysis of the EST database and these six sequenced BACs leads to the prediction that the tomato genome encodes approximately 35,000 genes, which are sequestered largely in euchromatic regions corresponding to less than one-quarter of the total DNA in the tomato nucleus.
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
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
King, M.-C., & Wilson, A. C. (1975) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1090005 · Cited by 2,815
Souer, E., van Houwelingen, A., Kloos, D., Mol, J., & Koes, R. (1996) · Cell · doi:10.1016/s0092-8674(00)81093-4 · Cited by 1,059
The limits of selection during maize domestication
Wang, R.-L., Stec, A., Hey, J., Lukens, L., & Doebley, J. (1999) · Nature · doi:10.1038/18435 · Cited by 740
Transcriptional regulators and the evolution of plant form
Doebley, J., & Lukens, L. (1998) · The Plant Cell · doi:10.1105/tpc.10.7.1075 · Cited by 421
Cited by
Genetic Regulation of Fruit Development and Ripening
Giovannoni, J. J. (2004) · THE PLANT CELL ONLINE · doi:10.1105/tpc.019158 · Cited by 1,427
Self-citationBlanc, G., & Wolfe, K. H. (2004) · The Plant Cell · doi:10.1105/tpc.021345 · Cited by 1,233
Li, L., Zhao, Y., McCaig, B. C., Wingerd, B. A., Wang, J., Whalon, M. E., Pichersky, E., & Howe, G. A. (2004) · The Plant Cell · doi:10.1105/tpc.017954 · Cited by 673
Control of Male Gametophyte Development
McCormick, S. (2004) · THE PLANT CELL ONLINE · doi:10.1105/tpc.016659 · Cited by 600
To clone or not to clone plant QTLs: present and future challenges
Salvi, S., & Tuberosa, R. (2005) · Trends in Plant Science · doi:10.1016/j.tplants.2005.04.008 · Cited by 543
Metadata
- Authors
- Van der Hoeven, R., Ronning, C., Giovannoni, J., Martin, G., & Tanksley, S.
- Venue
- The Plant Cell
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2002-07
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1441-1456
- ISSN
- 1040-4651 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-298X
- OpenAlex
- W2130156576
- Cited by
- 333
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 42.12
- 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: Deductions about the Number, Organization, and Evolution of Genes in the Tomato Genome Based on Analysis of a Large Expressed Sequence Tag Collection and Selective Genomic Sequencing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1105/tpc.010478
- The paper
- Van der Hoeven, R., Ronning, C., Giovannoni, J., Martin, G., & Tanksley, S. (2002). Deductions about the Number, Organization, and Evolution of Genes in the Tomato Genome Based on Analysis of a Large Expressed Sequence Tag Collection and Selective Genomic Sequencing. The Plant Cell. https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.010478
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.