Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
tortoise and the hare II: relative utility of 21 noncoding chloroplast DNA sequences for phylogenetic analysis
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
tortoise and the hare II: relative utility of 21 noncoding chloroplast DNA sequences for phylogenetic analysis
Do you wish to request the book?
tortoise and the hare II: relative utility of 21 noncoding chloroplast DNA sequences for phylogenetic analysis
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
tortoise and the hare II: relative utility of 21 noncoding chloroplast DNA sequences for phylogenetic analysis
2005
Overview
Chloroplast DNA sequences are a primary source of data for plant molecular systematic studies. A few key papers have provided the molecular systematics community with universal primer pairs for noncoding regions that have dominated the field, namely trnL-trnF and trnK/matK. These two regions have provided adequate information to resolve species relationships in some taxa, but often provide little resolution at low taxonomic levels. To obtain better phylogenetic resolution, sequence data from these regions are often coupled with other sequence data. Choosing an appropriate cpDNA region for phylogenetic investigation is difficult because of the scarcity of information about the tempo of evolutionary rates among different noncoding cpDNA regions. The focus of this investigation was to determine whether there is any predictable rate heterogeneity among 21 noncoding cpDNA regions identified as phylogenetically useful at low levels. To test for rate heterogeneity among the different cpDNA regions, we used three species from each of 10 groups representing eight major phylogenetic lineages of phanerogams. The results of this study clearly show that a survey using as few as three representative taxa can be predictive of the amount of phylogenetic information offered by a cpDNA region and that rate heterogeneity exists among noncoding cpDNA regions.
