Вход на сайт

Просмотр новости

Найдите то, что Вас интересует

Complete chloroplast genomes of endemic Astragalus and Oxytropis species from Uzbekistan [version 4; peer review: 2 approved]

Дата публикации: 14-07-2026 12:11:50

Chloroplast genomes provide important insights into plant phylogeny, genome evolution, and molecular marker development. In this study, we sequenced, assembled, and analyzed the complete chloroplast genomes of two endemic species from Uzbekistan, Astragalus nuratensis and Oxytropis pseudorosea. Genome skimming produced high-quality paired-end reads, yielding mean chloroplast sequencing depths of 638.13× for Astragalus nuratensis and 1,725.34× for Oxytropis pseudorosea, respectively. The chloroplast genomes were 122,316 bp in A. nuratensis and 122,708 bp in O. pseudorosea. Both genomes encoded 110 unique genes, including 76 protein-coding genes, 30 transfer RNA genes, and 4 ribosomal RNA genes. Consistent with members of the inverted repeat–lacking clade of Fabaceae, both species lacked the typical inverted repeat regions, resulting in a single-copy genome structure. Phylogenetic analysis based on 119 complete chloroplast genomes resolved major lineages within Astragalus and related genera with strong support. Astragalus nuratensis was placed within the Phaca clade, while Oxytropis pseudorosea formed part of a distinct Oxytropis lineage. These results provide new genomic resources for understanding evolutionary relationships and plastome evolution in Central Asian legumes.

Основное содержимое страницы с новостью.

Genome Note

Revised

[version 4; peer review: 2 approved]

Diyorjon Hamrayev1Bobur Karimov

https://orcid.org/0009-0005-5874-1033

1Husniddin Esanov

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2813-3019

2[...] Sodik Khuzhzhiev3Maxzuna Nasretdinova4Oysha Jabborova5Oybek Omonov6,7Mohistara Sharipova8Ziyoviddin Yusupov1Alijon Esankulov9

Diyorjon Hamrayev1Bobur Karimov

https://orcid.org/0009-0005-5874-1033

1[...] Husniddin Esanov

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2813-3019

2Sodik Khuzhzhiev3Maxzuna Nasretdinova4Oysha Jabborova5Oybek Omonov6,7Mohistara Sharipova8Ziyoviddin Yusupov1Alijon Esankulov9

Author details Author details

1 Institute of Botany, Academy of Sciences of Uzbekistan, Tashkent, Uzbekistan
2 Bukhara State University, Bukhara, Uzbekistan
3 Navoi State University, Navoi, Uzbekistan
4 Samarkand State Medical University, Samarkand, Uzbekistan
5 Bukhara state medical institute named after Abu Ali ibn Sino, Bukhara, Uzbekistan
6 Karshi State University, Qarshi, Kashkadarya Province, Uzbekistan
7 Turan University, Karshi, Uzbekistan
8 Jizzakh State Pedagogical University, Jizzakh, Uzbekistan
9 Tashkent Botanical Garden under the Institute of Botany, Academy of Sciences, Tashkent, Uzbekistan

Diyorjon Hamrayev
Roles: Writing – Original Draft Preparation

Bobur Karimov
Roles: Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing

Husniddin Esanov
Roles: Writing – Original Draft Preparation

Sodik Khuzhzhiev
Roles: Writing – Original Draft Preparation

Maxzuna Nasretdinova
Roles: Writing – Original Draft Preparation

Oysha Jabborova
Roles: Writing – Original Draft Preparation

Oybek Omonov
Roles: Writing – Original Draft Preparation

Mohistara Sharipova
Roles: Writing – Original Draft Preparation

Ziyoviddin Yusupov
Roles: Conceptualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing

Alijon Esankulov
Roles: Writing – Original Draft Preparation

OPEN PEER REVIEW

REVIEWER STATUS

Corresponding author: Ziyoviddin Yusupov Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information: This work was supported by the project “Digital Nature: Development of a digital platform for the flora of Central Uzbekistan” (2025–2029), implemented by the Institute of Botany, Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Uzbekistan. Additional support was provided by the project “Assessing climate change adaptation in endangered plants of Uzbekistan: A DNA barcoding approach” (AL-9224104464). The funders had no role in study design, data collection, analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Copyright:  © 2026 Hamrayev D et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. How to cite: Hamrayev D, Karimov B, Esanov H et al. Complete chloroplast genomes of endemic Astragalus and Oxytropis species from Uzbekistan [version 4; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research 2026, 15:445 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.178398.4) First published: 27 Mar 2026, 15:445 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.178398.1) Latest published: 14 Jul 2026, 15:445 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.178398.4)

Introduction

Chloroplast (cp) genomes of angiosperms have been widely used in studies of phylogeny, sequence variation, genome evolution, and the development of molecular markers (Dong et al., 2013). In most angiosperms, the cp genome exhibits a conserved quadripartite structure consisting of a large single-copy (LSC) region, a small single-copy (SSC) region, and two inverted repeat (IR) regions (Sugiura, 1992). Nevertheless, structural modifications, including gene rearrangements, inversions, expansion or loss of IR regions, gene loss, and pseudogene formation, have been documented in several lineages, particularly in Fabaceae (Cai et al., 2008; Son & Choi, 2022).

Fabaceae is one of the largest families of flowering plants and includes many species of considerable ecological and agricultural importance. According to recent classifications, the family is divided into six subfamilies: Caesalpinioideae, Cercidoideae, Detarioideae, Dialioideae, Duparquetioideae, and Faboideae (Papilionoideae) (Azani et al., 2017). Within Faboideae, the inverted repeat–lacking clade (IRLC) is characterized by the loss of one copy of the IR region (approximately 25 kb) in the chloroplast genome. This clade comprises about 52 genera and more than 4,000 species, and plastomes of IRLC taxa frequently show gene loss or pseudogenization (e.g., rps16, rpl22, infA, accD, and ycf4), intron loss (clpP, atpF, and rpoC1), inversions, and occasional transfer of genes to the nuclear genome (Son & Choi, 2022).

Within the IRLC, the genera Astragalus L. (3,095 species) and Oxytropis DC. (608 species) represent highly diverse and taxonomically complex groups (POWO, 2026). In recent years, complete chloroplast genome sequencing has been increasingly applied to resolve phylogenetic relationships and species boundaries within the genera Astragalus and Oxytropis. Several chloroplast genomes of species belonging to these genera have been published (Su et al., 2021; Li et al., 2025; Bobur et al., 2026). Despite these advances, chloroplast genome data remain limited for many narrowly distributed endemic species from Uzbekistan. In the present study, we sequenced, assembled, and analyzed the cp genomes of Oxytropis pseudorosea Filim. and Astragalus nuratensis Popov, two narrowly distributed endemic species from the Nuratau Mountains of Uzbekistan, Central Asia.

Methods

Leaf samples of Oxytropis pseudorosea and Astragalus nuratensis were collected in 2024 from the Nuratau Mountains, Uzbekistan, by Diyorjon Hamrayev. Astragalus nuratensis was identified by Beshko Natalya and its voucher specimen was deposited in the National Herbarium of Uzbekistan (TASH) under accession number TASH-2024-AN-001, whereas Oxytropis pseudorosea was identified by Doston Turdiyev and its voucher specimen was deposited in TASH under accession number TASH-2024-OP-002.

Genomic DNA was isolated from leaf tissue using the Tiangen DP305 Plant Genomic DNA Kit (Beijing, China). Libraries were prepared with the NEBNext® Ultra™ DNA Library Prep Kit for Illumina (NEB, USA; Cat. E7370L) following the manufacturer’s protocol, with index codes added during preparation. DNA was sonicated to ~350 bp and fragments were end-repaired, A-tailed, and ligated to Illumina adapters, followed by PCR amplification. PCR products were purified using AMPure XP beads (Beverly, USA). Library quality was assessed on an Agilent 5400 system, and concentrations were quantified by qPCR (1.5 nM). Qualified libraries were pooled and sequenced on Illumina platforms using the PE150 strategy at Novogene (Beijing, China).

Raw reads were assembled de novo using NOVOPlasty v4.3.5 (Dierckxsens et al., 2017), with the plastomes of Astragalus agrestis Douglas ex G. Don and Oxytropis neimonggolica C.W. Chang & Y.Z. Zhao serving as seed references. The assembly generated a single circular chloroplast genome for each species without structural ambiguities. To assess assembly accuracy and sequencing depth, clean paired-end reads were aligned to the assembled plastomes using BWA-MEM v0.7.17 (Li, 2013). Alignments were subsequently sorted and indexed with SAMtools v1.19.2 (Li et al., 2009). Genome annotation was conducted in Geneious v9.0.2 (Kearse et al., 2012) using closely related reference plastomes. Protein-coding genes, transfer RNAs, and ribosomal RNAs were annotated, and gene boundaries were manually curated to ensure accurate start/stop codons and intron–exon junctions. Furthermore, the cp map was generated using Chloroplot (https://irscope.shinyapps.io/chloroplot/) (Zheng et al., 2020).

For several taxa included in the phylogenetic analysis, complete chloroplast genome sequences were not available in GenBank. Only raw sequencing data (SRA accessions; SRR numbers listed in Table 1) were available. Therefore, the chloroplast genomes of these taxa were assembled de novo using NOVOPlasty v4.3.5 (Dierckxsens et al., 2017). A total of 119 complete chloroplast genome sequences were included in the phylogenetic analysis. Of these, two plastomes were newly sequenced in this study, while the remaining 117 sequences were downloaded from the NCBI GenBank database ( Table 1). Complete chloroplast genome sequences were aligned using MAFFT (Katoh & Standley, 2013). The alignment was manually inspected and used to reconstruct phylogenetic relationships under the maximum likelihood criterion in IQ-TREE 2 (Minh et al., 2020). The best-fit substitution model was selected using ModelFinder (Kalyaanamoorthy et al., 2017), and branch support was assessed with 1,000 ultrafast bootstrap replicates (Hoang et al., 2018).

Table 1. List of taxa used in the phylogenetic analysis, including their respective GenBank accession numbers.

For taxa lacking published chloroplast genome accessions, plastomes were assembled in this study from raw reads downloaded from the NCBI Sequence Read Archive (SRR accessions provided).

SpeciesAccessionSpecies AccessionAstragalus camptodontus SRR12136586A. aksuensis SRR12136588A. confertus SRR12136589A. massanderanus SRR12136591A. handelii SRR12136594A. zacharensis SRR12136595A. uliginosus SRR12136597A. koburensis SRR12136600A. beketowii SRR12136611A. jessenii SRR12136613A. tibetanus SRR12136615A. dendroides SRR12136619A. candissimus SRR12136622A. platyphyllus SRR12136623A. himalayanus SRR12136624A. roseus SRR12136625A. stalinskii SRR12136626A. orbicularifolius SRR12136627A. hamosus SRR12136635A. heinsensis SRR12136637A. hoantchy SRR12136647A. saccolacys SRR12136648A. neomondelphus SRR12136653A. schmalhausenii SRR12136654A. zingeri SRR12136656A. eximius SRR12136657A. xanthomeloides SRR12136658A. piletocladus SRR12136659A. parrowianus SRR12136660A. coluteocarpus SRR12136661A. thurberi SRR12136664A. americanus SRR12136665A. peduncularis SRR12136666A. dipelta SRR12136669A. acaulis PV802397A. austrotristis NC_063479A. adsurgens NC_085710A. angustidens ON550413A. agrestis PP328800A. alpinus NC_063482A. ampullarius PV870668A. arbuscula ON550410A. arpilobus NC_063483A. arrectus NC_047381A. bhotanensis NC_063484A. biristatus MZ923743A. calycosus var. calycosus MZ725323A. canadensis var. brevidens PV870770A. chinensis NC_063486A. clevelandii ON550409A. cognatus MZ127832A. chinense ON550407A. dilutus PV870843A. effusus MZ901207A. flexuosus var. flexuosus ON550403A. flexus NC_083391A. floridus NC_058825A. galactites OY754317A. glycyphyllos MY746310A. gummifer NC_063487A. gypsodes LC764834A. iranicus NC_077545A. juanquensis PV798172A. khasianus ON550401A. laksamanni NC_085734A. leucocephalus ON550399A. lithophilus PV870772A. lonchocarpus LC764835A. macropelmatus OP723863A. melilotoides var. tenuis OP723862A. membranaceus PV761671A. membranaceus var. membranaceus KX255662A. moseleios LC764836A. mongholicus OR712437A. mongholicus var. dahuricus MW719856A. mongholicus var. nakaianus KR296789A. muliensis NC_083909A. neglectus NC_063488A. nuratensis PX928918A. obscurus NC_063489A. odoratus LC764837A. oxylottis NC_077543A. pallasi NC_077542A. polysladus PV910879A. psilosepalus NC_083910A. purpurinus OR652287A. rumpens PX711949A. scaberrimus MW654102A. sereno var. sereno MZ923754A. sieversianus NC_077540A. sinicus OM287552A. stipulatus OR491698A. strictus MT120746A. toanus var. toanus MZ923756A. tongolensis PX754582A. tumabtsica NC_083912A. vulpinus ON550388A. wootonii var. wootonii MZ923757A. yunnanensis subsp. incanus PV156653A. zerabulaki PX711948Oxytropis chiliophylla PV694277O. filiformis PV684033O. latibracteata PV694278Oplonia microphylla PV684029O. neimongolica PV684030O. proboscidea PV694280O. pseudorosea PX512474O. sp. TT4869–1PX652196Tibetia liangshanensis MF193597Alhagi sparsifolia MW349013Caragana korshinskii KX289923Hedysarum taipeicum MK426698Caragana microphylla KX289922Corethrodendron multijugum OP748243Carmichaelia australis PV870797Phyllolobium chinense MZ221114Phyllolobium camptodontum SRR12136586Lessertia frutescens MF286764Sphaerophysa salsula PV870675
Results

Genome skimming generated a total of 39,668,027 paired-end reads for A. nuratensis and 16,998,801 paired-end reads for O. pseudorosea. After quality filtering, 39,666,696 and 16,994,332 reads were retained as high-quality reads for A. nuratensis and O. pseudorosea, respectively. Mapping of the filtered reads to the assembled chloroplast reference genomes showed that 540,829 reads (1.36%) in A. nuratensis and 1,421,542 reads (8.36%) in O. pseudorosea were successfully aligned. Properly paired reads accounted for 1.33% and 8.27% of the total reads, respectively. The chloroplast genome of Astragalus nuratensis was recovered with an average sequencing depth of 638.13×, with coverage ranging from 9× to 3273×. In comparison, the chloroplast genome of Oxytropis pseudorosea exhibited a substantially higher mean sequencing depth of 1,725.34×, with coverage ranging from 12× to 2146× (Figure 1).

82f36cdf-2676-4a63-be82-d34855331c25_figure1.gif

Figure 1. Coverage depth across the chloroplast genomes of Astragalus nuratensis and Oxytropis pseudorosea.

The complete chloroplast genome of O. pseudorosea was 122,708 bp in length, whereas that of A. nuratensis was 122,316 bp. Both genomes encoded a total of 110 unique genes, including 77 protein-coding genes (CDS), 30 transfer RNA (tRNA) genes, and 4 ribosomal RNA (rRNA) genes ( Figure 2). In both Astragalus nuratensis and Oxytropis pseudorosea, the genes rpl16, rpl2, rpoC1, ndhA, ndhB, petB, petD, atpF, clpP, trnA-UGC, trnG-UCC, trnI-GAU, trnK-UUU, trnL-UAA, and trnV-UAC each contain one intron, while ycf3 contains two introns. In addition, rps12 is a trans-spliced gene with two introns (one cis-spliced and one trans-spliced). Consistent with other members of the inverted repeat–lacking clade (IRLC) of legumes, the typical inverted repeat regions were absent in both species, resulting in a single-copy chloroplast genome structure, a feature commonly reported in plastome studies of Astragalus and related taxa (Moghaddam et al., 2023; Ma et al., 2025; Li et al., 2025).

82f36cdf-2676-4a63-be82-d34855331c25_figure2.gif

Figure 2. The circular maps of the chloroplast genomes of Oxytropis pseudorosea and Astragalus nuratensis were drawn using Chloroplot.

The innermost circle represents the lengths of chloroplast genomes. The second concentric ring illustrates nucleotide composition, where the orange segment indicates GC content and the yellow segment corresponds to AT content. The outermost circle displays the distribution of genes, which are color-coded according to their functional classification. The transcriptional orientation is indicated such that genes on the inner circle are transcribed clockwise, whereas those on the outer circle are transcribed anticlockwise.

Maximum likelihood analysis based on complete chloroplast genome sequences resolved the sampled taxa into several well-supported clades corresponding to recognized infrageneric groups within Astragalus and related genera ( Figure 3). Most backbone nodes received strong bootstrap support (BS ≥ 95), indicating a stable phylogenetic structure. The overall topology was consistent with previous phylogenomic studies of Astragalus, which also recovered major lineages with strong support using plastome and target-enrichment data (Su et al., 2021; Buono et al., 2025).

82f36cdf-2676-4a63-be82-d34855331c25_figure3.gif

Figure 3. Maximum likelihood phylogenetic tree inferred from complete chloroplast genome sequences showing the relationships of Astragalus nuratensis, Oxytropis pseudorosea, and other members of the inverted repeat–lacking clade (IRLC).

Species of Astragalus were distributed among the major lineages corresponding to the Hypoglottis, Neo-Astragalus, Diholcos, Astracantha, Contortuplicata, Hamosa, Trimeniaeus, and Phaca clades. Among these, the Phaca clade represented one of the largest lineages and included A. nuratensis, which grouped with other members of this clade with strong bootstrap support. In the phylogenetic tree, A. zerabulaki, another endemic species, was resolved within the Hypoglottis clade and formed a well-supported sister relationship with A. rumpens, indicating close evolutionary relationships among members of this lineage.

Species of Oxytropis, including O. pseudorosea, formed a distinct and well-supported lineage corresponding to the Oxytropis + Coluteoid clade, clearly separated from the main Astragalus lineages, in agreement with previous plastome-based phylogenies (Buono et al., 2025). O. pseudorosea (sect. Eumorpha) as sister to O. ikhbogdicus, despite the latter’s morphological affinity to section Mesogaea. This suggests that current morphological classifications in Oxytropis may reflect convergent evolution rather than true genetic relationships (Munkhtulga et al., 2026).

References
  •  Azani N, Babineau M, Bailey CD, et al.: A New Subfamily Classification of the Leguminosae Based on a Taxonomically Comprehensive Phylogeny: The Legume Phylogeny Working Group (LPWG). Taxon. 2017; 66: 44–77. Publisher Full Text
  •  Bobur K, Ziyoviddin Y, Ergashali R, et al.: Chloroplast genome evidence in assessing the taxonomic status of Astragalus zerabulaki Popov (Fabaceae), an endemic of Uzbekistan. Phytotaxa. 2026; 744(3): 249–260. Publisher Full Text
  •  Buono D, Kadereit G, Liston A, et al.: Building a robust backbone for Astragalus using a clade-specific target enrichment bait set. Am. J. Bot. 2025; 112(8): e70084. Publisher Full Text
  •  Cai Z, Guisinger M, Kim H-G, et al.: Extensive Reorganization of the Plastid Genome of Trifolium Subterraneum (Fabaceae) Is Associated with Numerous Repeated Sequences and Novel DNA Insertions. J. Mol. Evol. 2008; 67: 696–704. Publisher Full Text
  •  Dong W, Xu C, Cheng T, et al.: Sequencing angiosperm plastid genomes made easy: a complete set of universal primers and a case study on the phylogeny of Saxifragales. Genome Biol. Evol. 2013; 5(5): 989–997. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
  •  Dierckxsens N, Mardulyn P, Smits G: NOVOPlasty: de novo assembly of organelle genomes from whole genome data. Nucleic Acids Res. 2017; 45(4): e18.
  •  Hoang DT, Chernomor O, von Haeseler A , et al.: UFBoot2: Improving the ultrafast bootstrap approximation. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2018; 35(2): 518–522. Publisher Full Text
  •  Kalyaanamoorthy S, Minh BQ, Wong TKF, et al.: ModelFinder: Fast model selection for accurate phylogenetic estimates. Nat. Methods. 2017; 14: 587–589. Publisher Full Text
  •  Karimov B: Raw sequencing data of Astragalus nuratensis and Oxytropis pseudorosea. [Dataset]. NCBI BioProject. PRJNA1425239. 2026a. Reference Source
  •  Karimov B: Raw sequencing reads of Astragalus nuratensis and Oxytropis pseudorosea. [Dataset]. NCBI Sequence Read Archive (SRA). SRR37271903, SRR37271902. 2026b. Reference Source
  •  Karimov B: Chloroplast genomes of Astragalus nuratensis and Oxytropis pseudorosea. [Dataset]. GenBank. PX928918, PX512474. 2026c. Reference Source
  •  Karimov B, Tojibaev SK, Azimova D, et al.: Comparative analysis of complete chloroplast genomes of Cousinia (Asteraceae) species. Front. Plant Sci. 2025; 16: 1522950. Publisher Full Text
  •  Katoh K, Standley DM: MAFFT multiple sequence alignment software version 7: Improvements in performance and usability. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2013; 30(4): 772–780. Publisher Full Text
  •  Kearse M, Moir R, Wilson A, et al.: Geneious Basic: an integrated and extendable desktop software platform for the organization and analysis of sequence data. Bioinformatics. 2012; 28(12): 1647–1649. Publisher Full Text
  •  Li H: Aligning sequence reads, clone sequences and assembly contigs with BWA-MEM. arXiv preprint arxiv:1303.3997. 2013. Publisher Full Text
  •  Li H, Handsaker B, Wysoker A, et al.: The sequence alignment/map format and SAMtools. Bioinformatics. 2009; 25(16): 2078–2079. Publisher Full Text
  •  Li QQ, Niu Y, Zhang ZP, et al.: Comparative chloroplast genome analyses of Oxytropis DC. species: new insights into genome evolution and phylogenomic implications. Front. Plant Sci. 2025; 16: 1645582. Publisher Full Text
  •  Ma HT, Chen QY, Rao JH, et al.: A Comprehensive Comparative Analysis and Phylogenetic Investigation of the Chloroplast Genome Sequences in Four Astragalus Species. Curr. Issues Mol. Biol. 2025; 47(12): 978. Publisher Full Text
  •  Minh BQ, Schmidt HA, Chernomor O, et al.: IQ-TREE 2: New models and efficient methods for phylogenetic inference in the genomic era. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2020; 37(5): 1530–1534. Publisher Full Text
  •  Moghaddam M, Wojciechowski MF, Kazempour-Osaloo S: Characterization and comparative analysis of the complete plastid genomes of four Astragalus species. PLoS One. 2023; 18(5): e0286083. Publisher Full Text
  •  Munkhtulga D, Baasanmunkh S, Nyamgerel N, et al.: Oxytropis ikhbogdicus (Section Mesogaea, Fabaceae), A New Species From Mongolia Based on Morphological and Molecular Analyses. Ecol. Evol. 2026; 16(6): e73803. Publisher Full Text
  •  POWO: Plants of the World Online. Facilitated by the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew.2026. Published on the Internet. Retrieved 17 February 2026. Reference Source
  •  Son O, Choi KS: Characterization of the chloroplast genome structure of Gueldenstaedtia verna (Papilionoideae) and comparative analyses among IRLC species. Forests. 2022; 13(11): 1942. Publisher Full Text
  •  Su C, Duan L, Liu P, et al.: Chloroplast phylogenomics and character evolution of eastern Asian Astragalus (Leguminosae): Tackling the phylogenetic structure of the largest genus of flowering plants in Asia. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2021; 156: 107025. Publisher Full Text
  •  Sugiura M: The chloroplast genome. Plant Mol. Biol. 1992; 19: 149–168. Publisher Full Text
  •  Zheng S, Poczai P, Hyvönen J, et al.: Chloroplot: an online program for the versatile plotting of organelle genomes. Front. Genet. 2020; 11: 576124. Publisher Full Text

Grant information

This work was supported by the project “Digital Nature: Development of a digital platform for the flora of Central Uzbekistan” (2025–2029), implemented by the Institute of Botany, Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Uzbekistan. Additional support was provided by the project “Assessing climate change adaptation in endangered plants of Uzbekistan: A DNA barcoding approach” (AL-9224104464). The funders had no role in study design, data collection, analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Article Versions (4)

Published: 14 Jul 2026, 15:445

Published: 01 Jun 2026, 15:445

Published: 14 May 2026, 15:445

Published: 27 Mar 2026, 15:445

Copyright

© 2026 Hamrayev D et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Open Peer Review

Current Reviewer Status: ?

Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW HIDE

ApprovedThe paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested

Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.

Not approvedFundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions

Version 4

VERSION 4

PUBLISHED 14 Jul 2026

Revised

Reviewer Report 15 Jul 2026

Hoang Dang Khoa Do, Nguyen Tat Thanh University, Ho Chi Minh City, Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam 

Approved

VIEWS 0

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: Plant Chloroplast genomes

Close

Version 3

VERSION 3

PUBLISHED 01 Jun 2026

Revised

Reviewer Report 03 Jun 2026

Hoang Dang Khoa Do, Nguyen Tat Thanh University, Ho Chi Minh City, Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam 

Approved with Reservations

VIEWS 0

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: Plant Chloroplast genomes

Close

Version 2

VERSION 2

PUBLISHED 14 May 2026

Revised

Reviewer Report 22 May 2026

Hoang Dang Khoa Do, Nguyen Tat Thanh University, Ho Chi Minh City, Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam 

Approved with Reservations

VIEWS 0

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: Plant Chloroplast genomes

Close

Reviewer Report 20 May 2026

Yoshinori Fukasawa, Center for Bioscience Research and Education Utsunomiya University, Tochigi, Japan 

Approved

VIEWS 0

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: Plant genomics and bioinformatics

Close

Version 1

VERSION 1

PUBLISHED 27 Mar 2026

Reviewer Report 27 Apr 2026

Yoshinori Fukasawa, Center for Bioscience Research and Education Utsunomiya University, Tochigi, Japan 

Approved with Reservations

VIEWS 0

  • Are the rationale for sequencing the genome and the species significance clearly described?

    Yes

  • Are the protocols appropriate and is the work technically sound?

    Yes

  • Are sufficient details of the sequencing and extraction, software used, and materials provided to allow replication by others?

    Partly

  • Are the datasets clearly presented in a usable and accessible format, and the assembly and annotation available in an appropriate subject-specific repository?

    Yes

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: Plant genomics and bioinformatics

Close

Reviewer Report 03 Apr 2026

Hoang Dang Khoa Do, Nguyen Tat Thanh University, Ho Chi Minh City, Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam 

Approved with Reservations

VIEWS 0

  • Are the rationale for sequencing the genome and the species significance clearly described?

    Yes

  • Are the protocols appropriate and is the work technically sound?

    Yes

  • Are sufficient details of the sequencing and extraction, software used, and materials provided to allow replication by others?

    Partly

  • Are the datasets clearly presented in a usable and accessible format, and the assembly and annotation available in an appropriate subject-specific repository?

    Yes

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: Plant Chloroplast genomes

Close

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 4

VERSION 4 PUBLISHED 27 Mar 2026

Comment

Схожие новости

#Наименование новостиТональностьИнформативностьДата публикации
1The genome sequence of Plagiothecium denticulatum (Hedw.) Schimp. (Hypnales: Plagiotheciaceae) [version 1; peer review: awaiting peer review]010.2707-07-2026
2The genome sequence of Matricaria chamomilla L., 1753 (Asterales: Asteraceae) [version 1; peer review: awaiting peer review]013.9817-07-2026
3The genome sequence of Omalotheca supina (L.) DC., 1838 (Asterales: Asteraceae) [version 1; peer review: awaiting peer review]012.9415-07-2026
4Taxonomic identification accuracy from BOLD and GenBank databases using over a thousand insect DNA barcodes from Colombia04.7616-08-2026
5Isolation and characterization of the aconitate hydratase 4 (Aco4) gene from soybean015.8814-08-2026
6Científicos del CONICET crearon una herramienta bioinformática para descifrar el complejo genoma del Chagas06.4330-07-2026
7Denaturing and dNTPs reagents improve SARS-CoV-2 detection via single and multiplex RT-qPCR [version 3; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations]014.6602-05-2026
8Новосибирские ученые с помощью геномного редактирования создали легкий в обмолоте ячмень0028-06-2019
9DNA aus Höhlenmalerei/Malaria in Ostafrika/PFAS in Wandfarben0526-06-2026
10Российские ученые обнаружили у растения природный ДНК-инсектицид5709-07-2026

Классификация: . Схожих патентов: 0. Схожих новостей: 10. Тональность: 0. Информативность: 11.62. Источник: f1000research.com.