The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The tortoise and the hare: choosing between noncoding plastome and nuclear Adh sequences for phylogeny reconstruction in a recently diverged plant group
Open accessAbstract
Phylogenetic resolution is often low within groups of recently diverged taxa due to a paucity of phylogenetically informative characters. We tested the relative utility of seven noncoding cpDNA regions and a pair of homoeologous nuclear genes for resolving recent divergences, using tetraploid cottons (Gossypium) as a model system. The five tetraploid species of Gossypium are a monophyletic assemblage derived from an allopolyploidization event that probably occurred within the last 0.5–2 million years. Previous analysis of cpDNA restriction site data provided only partial resolution within this clade despite a large number of enzymes employed. We sequenced three cpDNA introns (rpl16, rpoC1, ndhA) and four cpDNA spacers (accD‐psaI, trnL‐trnF, trnT‐trnL, atpB‐rbcL) for a total of over 7 kb of sequence per taxon, yet obtained only four informative nucleotide substitutions (0.05%) resulting in incomplete phylogenetic resolution. In addition, we sequenced a 1.65‐kb region of a homoeologous pair of nuclear‐encoded alcohol dehydrogenase (Adh) genes. In contrast with the cpDNA sequence data, the Adh homoeologues yielded 25 informative characters (0.76%) and provided a robust and completely resolved topology that is concordant with previous cladistic and phenetic analyses. The enhanced resolution obtained using the nuclear genes reflects an approximately three‐ to sixfold increase in nucleotide substitution rate relative to the plastome spacers and introns.
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
Evolution of Protein Molecules
JUKES, T. H., & CANTOR, C. R. (1969) · Mammalian Protein Metabolism · doi:10.1016/b978-1-4832-3211-9.50009-7 · Cited by 11,032
Cited by
Ribosomal ITS sequences and plant phylogenetic inference
Álvarez, I., & Wendel, J. F. (2003) · Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution · doi:10.1016/s1055-7903(03)00208-2 · Cited by 1,877
Self-citationGenome evolution in polyploids
Wendel, J. F. (2000) · Plant Molecular Biology · doi:10.1023/a:1006392424384 · Cited by 1,600
Self-citationAdvances in the study of polyploidy since Plant speciation
Soltis, D. E., Soltis, P. S., & Tate, J. A. (2004) · New Phytologist · doi:10.1046/j.1469-8137.2003.00948.x · Cited by 720
A Statistical Approach for Distinguishing Hybridization and Incomplete Lineage Sorting
Joly, S., McLenachan, P. A., & Lockhart, P. J. (2009) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/600082 · Cited by 425
Koch, M., Haubold, B., & Mitchell‐Olds, T. (2001) · American Journal of Botany · doi:10.2307/2657117 · Cited by 395
Metadata
- Authors
- Small, R. L., Ryburn, J. A., Cronn, R. C., Seelanan, T., & Wendel, J. F.
- Venue
- American Journal of Botany
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1998-09
- Volume
- 85
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1301-1315
- ISSN
- 0002-9122 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-2197
- OpenAlex
- W2113419962
- Cited by
- 464
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 20.96
- 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: The tortoise and the hare: choosing between noncoding plastome and nuclear Adh sequences for phylogeny reconstruction in a recently diverged plant group. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/2446640
- The paper
- Small, R. L., Ryburn, J. A., Cronn, R. C., Seelanan, T., & Wendel, J. F. (1998). The tortoise and the hare: choosing between noncoding plastome and nuclear Adh sequences for phylogeny reconstruction in a recently diverged plant group. American Journal of Botany. https://doi.org/10.2307/2446640
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.