Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25740912›Full record

ReviewGenetics2015

Genetic and genomic toolbox of Zea mays.

Natalie J Nannas, R Kelly Dawe

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Genetics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing 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

32 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Lessons from a century of apical dominance research.Journal of experimental botany · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Developmental genetics of maize vegetative shoot architecture.Molecular breeding : new strategies in plant improvement · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  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

2 authors.

Natalie J NannasDepartment of Plant Biology, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602 Department of Genetics, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602.
R Kelly DaweDepartment of Plant Biology, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602 Department of Genetics, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602 kdawe@uga.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Maize has a long history of genetic and genomic tool development and is considered one of the most accessible higher plant systems. With a fully sequenced genome, a suite of cytogenetic tools, methods for both forward and reverse genetics, and characterized phenotype markers, maize is amenable to studying questions beyond plant biology. Major discoveries in the areas of transposons, imprinting, and chromosome biology came from work in maize. Moving forward in the post-genomic era, this classic model system will continue to be at the forefront of basic biological study. In this review, we outline the basics of working with maize and describe its rich genetic toolbox.

Indexed as

Genome, PlantCytogenetic AnalysisGenomicsZea maysgeneticsgenomicsmaizetools

Identifiers

PMID25740912
PMCPMC4349061

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.