Reply to Renner: Meticulous investigation, not sequencing effort, leads to robust conclusion
Journal
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
Journal Volume
117
Journal Issue
40
Pages
24632-24633
Date Issued
2020-09-29
Author(s)
Matsumura, H.
Hsiao, M.-C.
Lin, Y.-P.
Toyoda, A.
Taniai, N.
Tarora, K.
Urasaki, N.
Anand, S.S.
Dhillon, N.P.S.
Schafleitner, R.
Abstract
We thank Renner (1) for summarizing and comparing our study (2) with that of Cui et al. (3). Renner questions the logic of our domesticated/wild classification. As already mentioned (2), without a genetic tool, plant collectors assigned the cultivar/wild status purely based on whether a plant was cultivated. However, many cultures, such as the Amis people in Taiwan, frequently consume wild vegetables and sometimes transplant them into gardens. A plant collector would record such plant as a ��cultivar�� despite it genetically being a wild accession (e.g., THMC170). All of our analyses followed the grouping from solid genomic evidence. We agree that a broader sampling would be beneficial, if funding permits. Cui �K [?][1]1To whom correspondence may be addressed. Email: chengrueilee{at}ntu.edu.tw. [1]: #xref-corresp-1-1
Publisher
National Academy of Sciences
Type
letter