Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 696

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 70 of the 70 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Navigating the tip of the genomic iceberg: Next‐generation sequencing for plant systematics

Open access
Straub, Shannon C. K., Parks, Matthew, Weitemier, Kevin, Fishbein, Mark, Cronn, Richard C., Liston, Aaron·2012·American Journal of Botany

Abstract

• Premise of the study: Just as Sanger sequencing did more than 20 years ago, next‐generation sequencing (NGS) is poised to revolutionize plant systematics. By combining multiplexing approaches with NGS throughput, systematists may no longer need to choose between more taxa or more characters. Here we describe a genome skimming (shallow sequencing) approach for plant systematics. • Methods: Through simulations, we evaluated optimal sequencing depth and performance of single‐end and paired‐end short read sequences for assembly of nuclear ribosomal DNA (rDNA) and plastomes and addressed the effect of divergence on reference‐guided plastome assembly. We also used simulations to identify potential phylogenetic markers from low‐copy nuclear loci at different sequencing depths. We demonstrated the utility of genome skimming through phylogenetic analysis of the Sonoran Desert clade (SDC) of Asclepias (Apocynaceae). • Key results: Paired‐end reads performed better than single‐end reads. Minimum sequencing depths for high quality rDNA and plastome assemblies were 40× and 30×, respectively. Divergence from the reference significantly affected plastome assembly, but relatively similar references are available for most seed plants. Deeper rDNA sequencing is necessary to characterize intragenomic polymorphism. The low‐copy fraction of the nuclear genome was readily surveyed, even at low sequencing depths. Nearly 160000 bp of sequence from three organelles provided evidence of phylogenetic incongruence in the SDC. • Conclusions: Adoption of NGS will facilitate progress in plant systematics, as whole plastome and rDNA cistrons, partial mitochondrial genomes, and low‐copy nuclear markers can now be efficiently obtained for molecular phylogenetics 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 · 10.3732/ajb.1100335

Cites

70 of 70 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 70 references

Cited by

See all 696

Metadata

Authors
Straub, S. C. K., Parks, M., Weitemier, K., Fishbein, M., Cronn, R. C., & Liston, A.
Venue
American Journal of Botany
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-02
Volume
99
Issue
2
Pages
349-364
ISSN
  • 0002-9122 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-2197
OpenAlex
W2135581989
Cited by
696
References
70
FWCI
7.29
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: Navigating the tip of the genomic iceberg: Next‐generation sequencing for plant systematics. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3732/ajb.1100335
The paper
Straub, S. C. K., Parks, M., Weitemier, K., Fishbein, M., Cronn, R. C., & Liston, A. (2012). Navigating the tip of the genomic iceberg: Next‐generation sequencing for plant systematics. American Journal of Botany. https://doi.org/10.3732/ajb.1100335

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.