4.6 Article

Five Complete Chloroplast Genome Sequences from Diospyros: Genome Organization and Comparative Analysis

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 11, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0159566

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Key Technology R&D Program in the 12th Five-year Plan of China [2013BAD14B0502]
  2. Haplox Biotechnology Co., Ltd.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Diospyros is the largest genus in Ebenaceae, comprising more than 500 species with remarkable economic value, especially Diospyros kaki Thunb., which has traditionally been an important food resource in China, Korea, and Japan. Complete chloroplast (cp) genomes from D. kaki, D. lotus L., D. oleifera Cheng., D. glaucifolia Metc., and Diospyros 'Jinzaoshi' were sequenced using Illumina sequencing technology. This is the first cp genome reported in Ebenaceae. The cp genome sequences of Diospyros ranged from 157,300 to 157,784 bp in length, presenting a typical quadripartite structure with two inverted repeats each separated by one large and one small single-copy region. For each cp genome, 134 genes were annotated, including 80 protein-coding, 31 tRNA, and 4 rRNA unique genes. In all, 179 repeats and 283 single sequence repeats were identified. Four hypervariable regions, namely, intergenic region of trnQ_rps16, trnV_ndhC, and psbD_trnT, and intron of ndhA, were identified in the Diospyros genomes. Phylogenetic analyses based on the whole cp genome, protein-coding, and intergenic and intron sequences indicated that D. oleifera is closely related to D. kaki and could be used as a model plant for future research on D. kaki; to our knowledge, this is proposed for the first time. Further, these analyses together with two large deletions (301 and 140 bp) in the cp genome of D. 'Jinzaoshi', support its placement as a new species in Diospyros. Both maximum parsimony and likelihood analyses for 19 taxa indicated the basal position of Ericales in asterids and suggested that Ebenaceae is monophyletic in Ericales.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据