Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28673035›Full record

ArticleJournal of experimental botany2017

Getting back to nature: a reality check for experiments in controlled environments.

Maria Grazia Annunziata, Federico Apelt, Petronia Carillo, Ursula Krause, Regina Feil, Virginie Mengin, Martin A Lauxmann, Karin Köhl, Zoran Nikoloski, Mark Stitt and 2 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of experimental botany, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed
21.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

53 citing papers in PubMed, 107 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. OptimizingPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Circadian and environmental signal integration in a natural population ofProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

12 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Maria Grazia AnnunziataMax Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Am Mühlenberg 1, 14476 Potsdam-Golm, Germany.
Federico ApeltMax Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Am Mühlenberg 1, 14476 Potsdam-Golm, Germany.
Petronia CarilloUniversity of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Via Vivaldi 43, 81100 Caserta, Italy.
Ursula KrauseMax Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Am Mühlenberg 1, 14476 Potsdam-Golm, Germany.
Regina FeilMax Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Am Mühlenberg 1, 14476 Potsdam-Golm, Germany.
Virginie MenginMax Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Am Mühlenberg 1, 14476 Potsdam-Golm, Germany.
Martin A LauxmannMax Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Am Mühlenberg 1, 14476 Potsdam-Golm, Germany.
Karin KöhlMax Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Am Mühlenberg 1, 14476 Potsdam-Golm, Germany.
Zoran NikoloskiMax Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Am Mühlenberg 1, 14476 Potsdam-Golm, Germany.
Mark StittMax Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Am Mühlenberg 1, 14476 Potsdam-Golm, Germany.
John E LunnMax Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Am Mühlenberg 1, 14476 Potsdam-Golm, Germany.
Christine RainesUniversity of Essex.
Max Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology · DEUniversity of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" · ITUniversity of Potsdam · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Irradiance from sunlight changes in a sinusoidal manner during the day, with irregular fluctuations due to clouds, and light-dark shifts at dawn and dusk are gradual. Experiments in controlled environments typically expose plants to constant irradiance during the day and abrupt light-dark transitions. To compare the effects on metabolism of sunlight versus artificial light regimes, Arabidopsis thaliana plants were grown in a naturally illuminated greenhouse around the vernal equinox, and in controlled environment chambers with a 12-h photoperiod and either constant or sinusoidal light profiles, using either white fluorescent tubes or light-emitting diodes (LEDs) tuned to a sunlight-like spectrum as the light source. Rosettes were sampled throughout a 24-h diurnal cycle for metabolite analysis. The diurnal metabolite profiles revealed that carbon and nitrogen metabolism differed significantly between sunlight and artificial light conditions. The variability of sunlight within and between days could be a factor underlying these differences. Pairwise comparisons of the artificial light sources (fluorescent versus LED) or the light profiles (constant versus sinusoidal) showed much smaller differences. The data indicate that energy-efficient LED lighting is an acceptable alternative to fluorescent lights, but results obtained from plants grown with either type of artificial lighting might not be representative of natural conditions.

Indexed as

ArabidopsisCarbonEnvironment, ControlledFluorescenceLightLightingNitrogenStarchSucroseCarbonNitrogenStarchSucroseAmino acidArabidopsiscontrolled environmentLED lightingorganic acidstarchsucrosethalianatrehalose 6-phosphatevisible light spectrum

Identifiers

PMID28673035
PMCPMC5853417
OpenAlexW2726879675

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.