Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 983

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Genomes of Oryza sativa: A History of Duplications

Open access
Yu, Jun, Wang, Jun, Lin, Wei, Li, Songgang, Li, Heng, Zhou, Jun, Ni, Peixiang, Dong, Wei, Hu, Songnian, Zeng, Changqing, Zhang, Jianguo, Zhang, Yong, Li, Ruiqiang, Xu, Zuyuan, Li, Shengting, Li, Xianran, Zheng, Hongkun, Cong, Lijuan, Lin, Liang, Yin, Jianning, Geng, Jianing, Li, Guangyuan, Shi, Jianping, Liu, Juan, Lv, Hong, Li, Jun, Wang, Jing, Deng, Yajun, Ran, Longhua, Shi, Xiaoli, Wang, Xiyin, Wu, Qingfa, Li, Changfeng, Ren, Xiaoyu, Wang, Jingqiang, Wang, Xiaoling, Li, Dawei, Liu, Dongyuan, Zhang, Xiaowei, Ji, Zhendong, Zhao, Wenming, Sun, Yongqiao, Zhang, Zhenpeng, Bao, Jingyue, Han, Yujun, Dong, Lingli, Ji, Jia, Chen, Peng, Wu, Shuming, Liu, Jinsong, Xiao, Ying, Bu, Dongbo, Tan, Jianlong, Yang, Li, Ye, Chen, Zhang, Jingfen, Xu, Jingyi, Zhou, Yan, Yu, Yingpu, Zhang, Bing, Zhuang, Shulin, Wei, Haibin, Liu, Bin, Lei, Meng, Yu, Hong, Li, Yuanzhe, Xu, Hao, Wei, Shulin, He, Ximiao, Fang, Lijun, Zhang, Zengjin, Zhang, Yunze, Huang, Xiangang, Su, Zhixi, Tong, Wei, Li, Jinhong, Tong, Zongzhong, Li, Shuangli, Ye, Jia, Wang, Lishun, Fang, Lin, Lei, Tingting, Chen, Chen, Chen, Huan, Xu, Zhao, Li, Haihong, Huang, Haiyan, Zhang, Feng, Xu, Huayong, Li, Na, Zhao, Caifeng, Li, Shuting, Dong, Lijun, Huang, Yanqing, Li, Long, Xi, Yan, Qi, Qiuhui, Li, Wenjie, Zhang, Bo, Hu, Wei, Zhang, Yanling, Tian, Xiangjun, Jiao, Yongzhi, Liang, Xiaohu, Jin, Jiao, Gao, Lei, Zheng, Weimou, Hao, Bailin, Liu, Siqi, Wang, Wen, Yuan, Longping, Cao, Mengliang, McDermott, Jason, Samudrala, Ram, Wang, Jian, Wong, Gane Ka-Shu, Yang, Huanming·2005·PLoS Biology

Abstract

We report improved whole-genome shotgun sequences for the genomes of indica and japonica rice, both with multimegabase contiguity, or almost 1,000-fold improvement over the drafts of 2002. Tested against a nonredundant collection of 19,079 full-length cDNAs, 97.7% of the genes are aligned, without fragmentation, to the mapped super-scaffolds of one or the other genome. We introduce a gene identification procedure for plants that does not rely on similarity to known genes to remove erroneous predictions resulting from transposable elements. Using the available EST data to adjust for residual errors in the predictions, the estimated gene count is at least 38,000-40,000. Only 2%-3% of the genes are unique to any one subspecies, comparable to the amount of sequence that might still be missing. Despite this lack of variation in gene content, there is enormous variation in the intergenic regions. At least a quarter of the two sequences could not be aligned, and where they could be aligned, single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) rates varied from as little as 3.0 SNP/kb in the coding regions to 27.6 SNP/kb in the transposable elements. A more inclusive new approach for analyzing duplication history is introduced here. It reveals an ancient whole-genome duplication, a recent segmental duplication on Chromosomes 11 and 12, and massive ongoing individual gene duplications. We find 18 distinct pairs of duplicated segments that cover 65.7% of the genome; 17 of these pairs date back to a common time before the divergence of the grasses. More important, ongoing individual gene duplications provide a never-ending source of raw material for gene genesis and are major contributors to the differences between members of the grass family.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pbio.0030038

Cites

5 of 5 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

Cites

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 983

Metadata

Authors
Yu, J., Wang, J., Lin, W., Li, S., Li, H., Zhou, J., Ni, P., Dong, W., Hu, S., Zeng, C., Zhang, J., Zhang, Y., Li, R., Xu, Z., Li, S., Li, X., Zheng, H., Cong, L., Lin, L., Yin, J., Geng, J., Li, G., Shi, J., Liu, J., Lv, H., Li, J., Wang, J., Deng, Y., Ran, L., Shi, X., Wang, X., Wu, Q., Li, C., Ren, X., Wang, J., Wang, X., Li, D., Liu, D., Zhang, X., Ji, Z., Zhao, W., Sun, Y., Zhang, Z., Bao, J., Han, Y., Dong, L., Ji, J., Chen, P., Wu, S., Liu, J., Xiao, Y., Bu, D., Tan, J., Yang, L., Ye, C., Zhang, J., Xu, J., Zhou, Y., Yu, Y., Zhang, B., Zhuang, S., Wei, H., Liu, B., Lei, M., Yu, H., Li, Y., Xu, H., Wei, S., He, X., Fang, L., Zhang, Z., Zhang, Y., Huang, X., Su, Z., Tong, W., Li, J., Tong, Z., Li, S., Ye, J., Wang, L., Fang, L., Lei, T., Chen, C., Chen, H., Xu, Z., Li, H., Huang, H., Zhang, F., Xu, H., Li, N., Zhao, C., Li, S., Dong, L., Huang, Y., Li, L., Xi, Y., Qi, Q., Li, W., Zhang, B., Hu, W., Zhang, Y., Tian, X., Jiao, Y., Liang, X., Jin, J., Gao, L., Zheng, W., Hao, B., Liu, S., Wang, W., Yuan, L., Cao, M., McDermott, J., Samudrala, R., Wang, J., Wong, G. K.-S., & Yang, H.
Venue
PLoS Biology
Published
2005-02-01
Volume
3
Issue
2
Pages
e38
ISSN
  • 1544-9173 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-7885
OpenAlex
W1983193571
Cited by
983
References
5
FWCI
108.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: The Genomes of Oryza sativa: A History of Duplications. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pbio.0030038
The paper
Yu, J., Wang, J., Lin, W., Li, S., Li, H., Zhou, J., Ni, P., Dong, W., Hu, S., Zeng, C., Zhang, J., Zhang, Y., Li, R., Xu, Z., Li, S., Li, X., Zheng, H., Cong, L., Lin, L., . . . Yang, H. (2005). The Genomes of Oryza sativa: A History of Duplications. PLoS Biology. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0030038

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.