Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31168073›Full record

ReviewNature nanotechnology2019

Opportunities and challenges for nanotechnology in the agri-tech revolution.

Gregory V Lowry, Astrid Avellan, Leanne M Gilbertson

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature nanotechnology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 161 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
161citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Characterization ofJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

101 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

3 authors.

Gregory V LowryCivil and Environmental Engineering Department, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. glowry@cmu.edu.
Astrid AvellanCivil and Environmental Engineering Department, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6081-4389
Leanne M GilbertsonDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Current agricultural practices, developed during the green revolution, are becoming unsustainable, especially in the face of climate change and growing populations. Nanotechnology will be an important driver for the impending agri-tech revolution that promises a more sustainable, efficient and resilient agricultural system, while promoting food security. Here, we present the most promising new opportunities and approaches for the application of nanotechnology to improve the use efficiency of necessary inputs (light, water, soil) for crop agriculture, and for better managing biotic and abiotic stress. Potential development and implementation barriers are discussed, emphasizing the need for a systems approach to designing proposed nanotechnologies.

Indexed as

Climate ChangeCrop ProductionCrops, AgriculturalNanotechnologyFood SupplyHumans

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.