ArticlePlant methods2018
A low-cost method to rapidly and accurately screen for transpiration efficiency in wheat.
Article in Plant methods, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Improving wheat tolerance to post-flowering heat using matched development stages and field-based reaction norms.Journal of experimental botany · 2026Article
- Large Variations in the Transpiration of Sorghum Canopies Under High Evaporative Demand Are Positively Related to Water Use Efficiency.Plant, cell & environment · 2026Article
- Article
- Does late water deficit induce root growth or senescence in wheat?Frontiers in plant science · 2024Article
- Chamber-based system for measuring whole-plant transpiration dynamics.Plant-environment interactions (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2022Article
- Development and application of a relative soil water content - transpiration efficiency curve for screening high water use efficiency wheat cultivars.Frontiers in plant science · 2022Article
- From QTLs to Adaptation Landscapes: Using Genotype-To-Phenotype Models to Characterize G×E Over Time.Frontiers in plant science · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWheat (
resultsThe method revealed significant genotypic variations in TE among the 11 studied wheat genotypes. Genotype rankings for TE were consistent when plants were harvested the same day, at the flag-leaf stage or later. For these harvests, genotype rankings were consistent across experiments despite changes in environmental conditions, such as evaporative demand.
conclusionsThese results indicate that (1) the Pot-In-Bucket system is suitable to screen TE for breeding purposes in populations with varying phenology, (2) multiple short trials can be carried out within a season to allow increased throughput of genotypes for TE screening, and (3) root biomass measurement is not required to screen for TE, as whole-plant TE and shoot-only TE are highly correlated, at least in wheat. The method is particularly relevant in developing countries where low-cost and relatively high labour input may be most applicable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.