| Literature DB >> 29649295 |
Grit Winterfeld, Hannes Becher, Stephanie Voshell, Khidir Hilu, Martin Röser.
Abstract
[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0192869.].Entities:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29649295 PMCID: PMC5897006 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0195889
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 3Taxonomic classification [9], life form, chromosomal properties and genome size [38] of diploid and tetraploid Phalaris species on a ITS phylogram based on Bayesian inference [8].
Parsimony bootstrap values and Bayesian support are noted above and below the branches.
Fig 4Possible scenario of reductional dysploidy in the genus Phalaris.
A: Chromosome prototypes (proto) of a fictive ancestral x = 7 genome A karyotype numbered according to the ideograms of P. brachystachys and P. canariensis in Fig 2; B: Pericentromeric break in proto-A7, end-to-end fusion with proto-A2 and proto-A6 and loss of centromere; C: Paracentric inversion of fused arms; D: Reductional dysploidy to an extant x = 6 karyotype with strong asymmetric chromosomes. m—metacentric, sm/st—submetacentric/subtelocentric.
Fig 6Geographical distribution of different genomes A, B, and C in eight species of Phalaris and possible expansions routes and time of diversification within the genus according to Voshell & Hilu [10].