Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,866

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

Comparison of different nuclear DNA markers for estimating intraspecific genetic diversity in plants

Nybom, Hilde·2004·Molecular Ecology

Abstract

A compilation was made of 307 studies using nuclear DNA markers for evaluating among‐ and within‐population diversity in wild angiosperms and gymnosperms. Estimates derived by the dominantly inherited markers (RAPD, AFLP, ISSR) are very similar and may be directly comparable. STMS analysis yields almost three times higher values for within‐population diversity whereas among‐population diversity estimates are similar to those derived by the dominantly inherited markers. Number of sampled plants per population and number of scored microsatellite DNA alleles are correlated with some of the population genetics parameters. In addition, maximum geographical distance between sampled populations has a strong positive effect on among‐population diversity. As previously verified with allozyme data, RAPD‐ and STMS‐based analyses show that long‐lived, outcrossing, late successional taxa retain most of their genetic variability within populations. By contrast, annual, selfing and/or early successional taxa allocate most of the genetic variability among populations. Estimates for among‐ and within‐population diversity, respectively, were negatively correlated. The only major discrepancy between allozymes and STMS on the one hand, and RAPD on the other hand, concerns geographical range; within‐population diversity was strongly affected when the former methods were used but not so in the RAPD‐based studies. Direct comparisons between the different methods, when applied to the same plant material, indicate large similarities between the dominant markers and somewhat lower similarity with the STMS‐based data, presumably due to insufficient number of analysed microsatellite DNA loci in many studies.

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 · 10.1111/j.1365-294x.2004.02141.x

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 1,866

Metadata

Authors
Nybom, H.
Venue
Molecular Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2004-04-06
Volume
13
Issue
5
Pages
1143-1155
ISSN
  • 0962-1083 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-294X
OpenAlex
W1921511347
Cited by
1,866
References
1
FWCI
27.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Comparison of different nuclear DNA markers for estimating intraspecific genetic diversity in plants. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-294x.2004.02141.x
The paper
Nybom, H. (2004). Comparison of different nuclear DNA markers for estimating intraspecific genetic diversity in plants. Molecular Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294x.2004.02141.x

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.