Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20697717›Full record

ReviewPlant cell reports2010

Current trends and future prospects of biotechnological interventions through tissue culture in apple.

Shammi Bhatti, Gopaljee Jha

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Plant cell reports, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Fox Hunting in Wild Apples: Searching for Novel Genes inInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2020
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Stable and efficient transformation of apple.Plant biotechnology (Tokyo, Japan) · 2020
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. 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

2 authors.

Shammi BhattiBiotechnology Division, Institute of Himalayan Bioresource Technology, Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, Palampur, 176061, Himachal Pradesh, India.
Gopaljee Jha

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Apple (Malus domestica Borkh.), which is a widely cultivated, important economic fruit crop with nutritive and medicinal importance, has emerged as a model horticultural crop in this post-genomic era. Apple cultivation is heavily dependent on climatic condition and is susceptible to several diseases caused by fungi, bacteria, viruses, insects, etc. Extensive research work has been carried out to standardize tissue culture protocols and utilize them in apple improvement. We review the in vitro shoot multiplication, rooting, transformation and regeneration methodologies in apple and tabulate various such protocols for easy reference. The utility and limitation of transgenesis in apple improvement have also been summarized. The concepts of marker-free plants, use of non-antibiotic resistance selectable markers, and cisgenic and intragenic approaches are highlighted. Furthermore, the limitations, current trends and future prospects of tissue culture-mediated biotechnological interventions in apple improvement are discussed.

Indexed as

Tissue Culture TechniquesAgricultureBiotechnologyCrops, AgriculturalCulture MediaMalusPlant DiseasesPlants, Genetically ModifiedCulture Media

Identifiers

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.