Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17273892›Full record

ReviewJournal of plant research2007

DNA banking for plant breeding, biotechnology and biodiversity evaluation.

Trevor R Hodkinson, Stephen Waldren, John A N Parnell, Colin T Kelleher, Karine Salamin, Nicolas Salamin

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of plant research, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 66 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Complete chloroplast genome sequence of a major allogamous forage species, perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.).DNA research : an international journal for rapid publication of reports on genes and genomes · 2009
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Trevor R HodkinsonDepartment of Botany, School of Natural Sciences, University of Dublin, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland. trevor.hodkinson@tcd.ie
Stephen Waldren
John A N Parnell
Colin T Kelleher
Karine Salamin
Nicolas Salamin
Trinity College Dublin · IEUniversity of British Columbia · CAUniversity of Lausanne · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The manipulation of DNA is routine practice in botanical research and has made a huge impact on plant breeding, biotechnology and biodiversity evaluation. DNA is easy to extract from most plant tissues and can be stored for long periods in DNA banks. Curation methods are well developed for other botanical resources such as herbaria, seed banks and botanic gardens, but procedures for the establishment and maintenance of DNA banks have not been well documented. This paper reviews the curation of DNA banks for the characterisation and utilisation of biodiversity and provides guidelines for DNA bank management. It surveys existing DNA banks and outlines their operation. It includes a review of plant DNA collection, preservation, isolation, storage, database management and exchange procedures. We stress that DNA banks require full integration with existing collections such as botanic gardens, herbaria and seed banks, and information retrieval systems that link such facilities, bioinformatic resources and other DNA banks. They also require efficient and well-regulated sample exchange procedures. Only with appropriate curation will maximum utilisation of DNA collections be achieved.

Indexed as

BiotechnologyBreedingDNA, PlantSpecies SpecificityDNA, Plant

Identifiers

PMID17273892
OpenAlexW2022750745

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.