Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27446095›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in plant science2016

Assessing Utilization and Environmental Risks of Important Genes in Plant Abiotic Stress Tolerance.

Mohammad S Khan, Muhammad A Khan, Dawood Ahmad

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in plant science, 2016. 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
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Overexpression of a Novel Arabidopsis GeneFrontiers in plant science · 2020
    Article
  9. …Fell Upas Sits, the Hydra-Tree of DeathMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Characterization of3 Biotech · 2018
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Impact of TransgenicFrontiers in plant science · 2017
    Article
  14. Article
  15. 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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Mohammad S KhanFaculty of Crop Production Sciences, Institute of Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering, The University of Agriculture, Peshawar Pakistan.
Muhammad A KhanResearch School of Biology, ANU College of Medicine, Biology and Environment, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT Australia.
Dawood AhmadFaculty of Crop Production Sciences, Institute of Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering, The University of Agriculture, Peshawar Pakistan.
Australian National University · AUThe University of Agriculture, Peshawar · PK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Transgenic plants with improved salt and drought stress tolerance have been developed with a large number of abiotic stress-related genes. Among these, the most extensively used genes are the glycine betaine biosynthetic codA, the DREB transcription factors, and vacuolar membrane Na(+)/H(+) antiporters. The use of codA, DREBs, and Na(+)/H(+) antiporters in transgenic plants has conferred stress tolerance and improved plant phenotype. However, the future deployment and commercialization of these plants depend on their safety to the environment. Addressing environmental risk assessment is challenging since mechanisms governing abiotic stress tolerance are much more complex than that of insect resistance and herbicide tolerance traits, which have been considered to date. Therefore, questions arise, whether abiotic stress tolerance genes need additional considerations and new measurements in risk assessment and, whether these genes would have effects on weediness and invasiveness potential of transgenic plants? While considering these concerns, the environmental risk assessment of abiotic stress tolerance genes would need to focus on the magnitude of stress tolerance, plant phenotype and characteristics of the potential receiving environment. In the present review, we discuss environmental concerns and likelihood of concerns associated with the use of abiotic stress tolerance genes. Based on our analysis, we conclude that the uses of these genes in domesticated crop plants are safe for the environment. Risk assessment, however, should be carefully conducted on biofeedstocks and perennial plants taking into account plant phenotype and the potential receiving environment.

Indexed as

abiotic stressesantiportersbiosafety assessmentcodADREBstransgenic plants

Identifiers

PMID27446095
PMCPMC4919908
OpenAlexW2463751325

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.