Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23749845›Full record

SynthesisThe Plant cell2013

Data integration through proximity-based networks provides biological principles of organization across scales.

Sabrina Kleessen, Sebastian Klie, Zoran Nikoloski

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Plant cell, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. 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

3 authors.

Sabrina KleessenSystems Biology and Mathematical Modeling Group, Max Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology, 14476 Potsdam-Golm, Germany.
Sebastian Klie
Zoran Nikoloski

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Plant behaviors across levels of cellular organization, from biochemical components to tissues and organs, relate and reflect growth habitats. Quantification of the relationship between behaviors captured in various phenotypic characteristics and growth habitats can help reveal molecular mechanisms of plant adaptation. The aim of this article is to introduce the power of using statistics originally developed in the field of geographic variability analysis together with prominent network models in elucidating principles of biological organization. We provide a critical systematic review of the existing statistical and network-based approaches that can be employed to determine patterns of covariation from both uni- and multivariate phenotypic characteristics in plants. We demonstrate that parameter-independent network-based approaches result in robust insights about phenotypic covariation. These insights can be quantified and tested by applying well-established statistics combining the network structure with the phenotypic characteristics. We show that the reviewed network-based approaches are applicable from the level of genes to the study of individuals in a population of Arabidopsis thaliana. Finally, we demonstrate that the patterns of covariation can be generalized to quantifiable biological principles of organization. Therefore, these network-based approaches facilitate not only interpretation of large-scale data sets, but also prediction of biochemical and biological behaviors based on measurable characteristics.

Indexed as

Models, StatisticalAdaptation, PhysiologicalArabidopsisGene Expression ProfilingGene Regulatory NetworksMetabolomicsPhenotypePlantsSignal Transduction

Identifiers

PMID23749845
PMCPMC3723603

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.