Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31134106›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in plant science2019

Callus, Dedifferentiation, Totipotency, Somatic Embryogenesis: What These Terms Mean in the Era of Molecular Plant Biology?

Attila Fehér

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in plant science, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 131 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
131citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

131 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Characterization ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Article
  8. The Promise of Synthetic Biology for Redesigning Plant Architecture.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Genome-Wide Identification and Characterization of theInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. In Vitro Production ofPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article

71 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

1 author.

Attila FehérDepartment of Plant Biology, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent findings call for the critical overview of some incorrectly used plant cell and tissue culture terminology such as dedifferentiation, callus, totipotency, and somatic embryogenesis. Plant cell and tissue culture methods are efficient means to preserve and propagate genotypes with superior germplasm as well as to increase genetic variability for breading. Besides, they are useful research tools and objects of plant developmental biology. The history of plant cell and tissue culture dates back to more than a century. Its basic methodology and terminology were formulated preceding modern plant biology. Recent progress in molecular and cell biology techniques allowed unprecedented insights into the underlying processes of plant cell/tissue culture and regeneration. The main aim of this review is to provide a theoretical framework supported by recent experimental findings to reconsider certain historical, even dogmatic, statements widely used by plant scientists and teachers such as "plant cells are totipotent" or "callus is a mass of dedifferentiated cells," or "somatic embryos have a single cell origin." These statements are based on a confused terminology. Clarification of it might help to avoid further misunderstanding and to overcome potential "terminology-raised" barriers in plant research.

Indexed as

callusdedifferentiationplant cell and tissue cultureplant regenerationsomatic embryogenesisterminologytotipotency

Identifiers

PMID31134106
PMCPMC6524723

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.