Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20885372›Full record

ArticleNature protocols2010

A high-throughput method for the quantitative analysis of auxins.

Lana S Barkawi, Yuen-Yee Tam, Julie A Tillman, Jennifer Normanly, Jerry D Cohen

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Nature protocols, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing 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

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Metamaterial architecture from a self-shaping carnivorous plant.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2019
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

Lana S BarkawiDepartment of Horticultural Science, Microbial and Plant Genomics Institute, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, USA. barka003@umn.edu
Yuen-Yee Tam
Julie A Tillman
Jennifer Normanly
Jerry D Cohen

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Auxin measurements in plants are critical to understanding both auxin signaling and metabolic homeostasis. The most abundant natural auxin is indole-3-acetic acid (IAA). This protocol is for the precise, high-throughput determination of free IAA in plant tissue by isotope dilution analysis using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS). The steps described are as follows: harvesting of plant material; amino and polymethylmethacrylate solid-phase purification followed by derivatization with diazomethane (either manual or robotic); GC-MS analysis; and data analysis. [¹³C₆]IAA is the standard used. The amount of tissue required is relatively small (25 mg of fresh weight) and one can process more than 500 samples per week using an automated system. To extract eight samples, this procedure takes ∼3 h, whether performed manually or robotically. For processing more than eight samples, robotic extraction becomes substantially more time efficient, saving at least 0.5 h per additional batch of eight samples.

Indexed as

AutomationCarbon IsotopesDiazomethaneGas Chromatography-Mass SpectrometryHigh-Throughput Screening AssaysIndoleacetic AcidsMethylationPlant ExtractsPlant Growth RegulatorsPlantsReference StandardsReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificitySolid Phase ExtractionCarbon IsotopesDiazomethaneindoleacetic acidIndoleacetic AcidsPlant ExtractsPlant Growth Regulators

Identifiers

PMID20885372

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.