Talk:List of sequenced plastomes

Scope
Whether nucleomorph and Paulinella cyanelle genomes are plastomes is at best debatable, but since they are too few (unlike, say, mitomes) to justify a separate list, it is convenient to append them to this list. Lavateraguy (talk) 10:42, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Section headers
Two of these were unfamiliar to me. The first was Cyanophytes, which I see is the group which I would know as cyanobacteria (most likely) or blue-green algae. The second is Metalgae, a word which seems to appear nowhere on wikipedia and only 5 places on google. Is this misspelled? I see it includes Euglenids, Cryptomonads, and I don't know what Odontella sinensis is. Perhaps just make section headers for each of those groups and rename "other" to Apicomplexa (and add new sections as needed for dinoflagellates and the others)? Kingdon (talk) 04:46, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Cyanophyte was a slip of the brain; I meant glaucophyte, which are those few species with primarily endosymbiotic photosynthesis which are neither green nor red algae. Metalgae seems to be a misrecollection on my part of meta-algae, which are species which have secondary or tertiary endosymbiotic photosynthesis. Dinoflagellates are meta-algae. Apicomplexans are the biggest group of others, but there's the question as to where you draw the line with secondarily aphotosynthetic euglenoids and chlorarachniophytes and related species. (Cf. Epifagus virginiana is still a plant.) Lavateraguy (talk) 09:55, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I guess I would include non-photosynthetic euglenoids and chlorarachniophytes along with their photosynthetic relatives, I guess just because it seems a bit odd to classify the page phylogenetically everywhere else and then fall back to a definition based on photosynthetic vs not. This would imply a definition similar to the one we now have for "meta-algae" but without the word "photosynthetic" (so "other" would go away).  It is possible that the best term is something like "eukaryotes with secondary and tertiary plastids" and the best definition is just to list the 7 groups. Another term in the literature is "eukaryote-eukaryote chimaeras" but that seems less common than "secondary plastid". Kingdon (talk) 14:45, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Notes column
On some of the tables, i put in a column for notes. For the ferns, lycophytes, and gymnosperms, i put family names in this column. I am considering family and order names for the flowering plants. Does anyone think that this extends the table excessively? I would appreciate some comment before i go ahead with this. 128.171.106.243 (talk) 00:27, 5 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Not sure I have a strong opinion, but it strikes me as a bit more natural to organize the list by family (or perhaps order or monocot/eudicot/magnoliid/etc), with headings for each group. Kingdon (talk) 00:07, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Number of genes
The NCBI list does not correlate with the numbers shown here. Does anyone have a strong opinion on whether we should use the original publication or the current number on NCBI? I'd prefer to use the NCBI data, and to list protein coding genes to separately to RNA genes. If there are no complaints, I'll start in a week or so. Aaadddaaammm (talk) 01:58, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Red Algae
There a paywalled article in Current Biology with 6 new rhodophyte plastomes. Judging by the abstract it will also give citations to more than the current 5 plastomes listed on the page. Lavateraguy (talk) 09:43, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of sequenced plastomes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20061004083557/http://www.expasy.ch/sprot/hamap/plastid.html to http://www.expasy.ch/sprot/hamap/plastid.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:54, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

What to do with this page?
The number of published plastomes is now increasing at a great pace. (There are now 244 for Malvaceae alone, though with some species replicated several times over.) Extremely large lists (e.g. list of minor planets, list of placental mammals) are not without precedent in Wikipedia, but it might be worth having a discussion about the way forward for this page. Lavateraguy (talk) 19:53, 8 May 2021 (UTC)


 * There are 29 thousand plastomes of 12 thousand species could be found in Genbank, accounting for almost 4% of known plant species. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/?term=%22chloroplast%2C+complete+genome%22 ——🦝 The Interaccoonale Will be the raccoon race(talk・contribs) 06:20, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I think it would be a good idea to list the number of sequenced species by family or genus. ——🦝 The Interaccoonale Will be the raccoon race(talk・contribs) 06:32, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Perhaps we should move to Plastome sequence and talk about most salient or earliest sequences, methods and applications. Invasive Spices (talk) 3 November 2022 (UTC)
 * But I think applications should be in chloroplast DNA, for example, plastome as a phylogenomic marker.——🦝 The Interaccoonale Will be the raccoon race(talk・contribs) 03:30, 7 November 2022 (UTC)