Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19685153›Full record

ReviewTransgenic research2010

Critical evaluation of strategies for mineral fortification of staple food crops.

Sonia Gómez-Galera, Eduard Rojas, Duraialagaraja Sudhakar, Changfu Zhu, Ana M Pelacho, Teresa Capell, Paul Christou

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Transgenic research, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
16.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

57 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 284 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. The 4T and 7T introgressions fromFrontiers in plant science · 2024
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Sonia Gómez-GaleraDepartment of Vegetal Production and Forestry Science, ETSEA, University of Lleida, 25198 Lleida, Spain. sonia.gomez@pvcf.udl.cat
Eduard Rojas
Duraialagaraja Sudhakar
Changfu Zhu
Ana M Pelacho
Teresa Capell
Paul Christou
Universitat de Lleida · ESTamil Nadu Agricultural University · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Staple food crops, in particular cereal grains, are poor sources of key mineral nutrients. As a result, the world's poorest people, generally those subsisting on a monotonous cereal diet, are also those most vulnerable to mineral deficiency diseases. Various strategies have been proposed to deal with micronutrient deficiencies including the provision of mineral supplements, the fortification of processed food, the biofortification of crop plants at source with mineral-rich fertilizers and the implementation of breeding programs and genetic engineering approaches to generate mineral-rich varieties of staple crops. This review provides a critical comparison of the strategies that have been developed to address deficiencies in five key mineral nutrients-iodine, iron, zinc, calcium and selenium-and discusses the most recent advances in genetic engineering to increase mineral levels and bioavailability in our most important staple food crops.

Indexed as

Food, FortifiedAgricultureCrops, AgriculturalDeficiency DiseasesGenetic EngineeringHumansMineralsPlants, Genetically ModifiedPovertyMinerals

Identifiers

PMID19685153
OpenAlexW2040213368

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.