Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 421

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

Comparative Genomics of Brassica oleracea and Arabidopsis thaliana Reveal Gene Loss, Fragmentation, and Dispersal after Polyploidy

Open access
Town, Christopher D., Cheung, Foo, Maiti, Rama, Crabtree, Jonathan, Haas, Brian J., Wortman, Jennifer R., Hine, Erin E., Althoff, Ryan, Arbogast, Tamara S., Tallon, Luke J., Vigouroux, Marielle, Trick, Martin, Bancroft, Ian·2006·The Plant Cell

Abstract

We sequenced 2.2 Mb representing triplicated genome segments of Brassica oleracea, which are each paralogous with one another and homologous with a segmentally duplicated region of the Arabidopsis thaliana genome. Sequence annotation identified 177 conserved collinear genes in the B. oleracea genome segments. Analysis of synonymous base substitution rates indicated that the triplicated Brassica genome segments diverged from a common ancestor soon after divergence of the Arabidopsis and Brassica lineages. This conclusion was corroborated by phylogenetic analysis of protein families. Using A. thaliana as an outgroup, 35% of the genes inferred to be present when genome triplication occurred in the Brassica lineage have been lost, most likely via a deletion mechanism, in an interspersed pattern. Genes encoding proteins involved in signal transduction or transcription were not found to be significantly more extensively retained than those encoding proteins classified with other functions, but putative proteins predicted in the A. thaliana genome were underrepresented in B. oleracea. We identified one example of gene loss from the Arabidopsis lineage. We found evidence for the frequent insertion of gene fragments of nuclear genomic origin and identified four apparently intact genes in noncollinear positions in the B. oleracea and A. thaliana genomes.

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 · 10.1105/tpc.106.041665

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 421

Metadata

Authors
Town, C. D., Cheung, F., Maiti, R., Crabtree, J., Haas, B. J., Wortman, J. R., Hine, E. E., Althoff, R., Arbogast, T. S., Tallon, L. J., Vigouroux, M., Trick, M., & Bancroft, I.
Venue
The Plant Cell
Published
2006-04-21
Volume
18
Issue
6
Pages
1348-1359
ISSN
  • 1040-4651 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-298X
OpenAlex
W2167719653
Cited by
421
References
1
FWCI
26.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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 Brassica oleracea and Arabidopsis thaliana Reveal Gene Loss, Fragmentation, and Dispersal after Polyploidy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1105/tpc.106.041665
The paper
Town, C. D., Cheung, F., Maiti, R., Crabtree, J., Haas, B. J., Wortman, J. R., Hine, E. E., Althoff, R., Arbogast, T. S., Tallon, L. J., Vigouroux, M., Trick, M., & Bancroft, I. (2006). Comparative Genomics of Brassica oleracea and Arabidopsis thaliana Reveal Gene Loss, Fragmentation, and Dispersal after Polyploidy. The Plant Cell. https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.106.041665

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.