Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27401910›Full record

ArticleJournal of experimental botany2016

Reduced crown root number improves water acquisition under water deficit stress in maize (Zea mays L.).

Yingzhi Gao, Jonathan P Lynch

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of experimental botany, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 88 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
88citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

88 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

28 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Yingzhi GaoKey Laboratory of Vegetation Ecology, Institute of Grassland Science, Northeast Normal University, Changchun 130024, Jilin Province, China Department of Plant Science, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA.
Jonathan P LynchDepartment of Plant Science, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA jpl4@psu.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-7265-9790

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this study we test the hypothesis that maize genotypes with reduced crown root number (CN) will have greater root depth and improved water acquisition from drying soil. Maize recombinant inbred lines with contrasting CN were evaluated under water stress in greenhouse mesocosms and field rainout shelters. CN varied from 25 to 62 among genotypes. Under water stress in the mesocosms, genotypes with low CN had 31% fewer crown roots, 30% deeper rooting, 56% greater stomatal conductance, 45% greater leaf CO2 assimilation, 61% net canopy CO2 assimilation, and 55% greater shoot biomass than genotypes with high CN at 35 days after planting. Under water stress in the field, genotypes with low CN had 21% fewer crown roots, 41% deeper rooting, 48% lighter stem water oxygen isotope enrichment (δ(18)O) signature signifying deeper water capture, 13% greater leaf relative water content, 33% greater shoot biomass at anthesis, and 57% greater yield than genotypes with high CN. These results support the hypothesis that low CN improves drought tolerance by increasing rooting depth and water acquisition from the subsoil.

Indexed as

DehydrationPlant RootsWaterZea maysWaterCrown root numberdroughtmaizerespirationrooting depthwater stress.

Identifiers

PMID27401910
PMCPMC4973737

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.