Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31245763›Full record

ArticlePlant direct2019

An integrated transcriptomics and metabolomics analysis of the

Erik M Solhaug, Rahul Roy, Elizabeth C Chatt, Peter M Klinkenberg, Nur-Aziatull Mohd-Fadzil, Marshall Hampton, Basil J Nikolau, Clay J Carter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plant direct, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Natural processes influencing pollinator health.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2022
    Article
  11. Sweet solutions: nectar chemistry and quality.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2022
    Review
  12. Nectary development inFrontiers in plant science · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Comparative genomic analysis of expansin superfamily gene members in zucchini and cucumber and their expression profiles under different abiotic stresses.Physiology and molecular biology of plants : an international journal of functional plant biology · 2021
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors.

Erik M SolhaugDepartment of Plant & Microbial Biology University of Minnesota St. Paul Minnesota.
Rahul RoyDepartment of Plant & Microbial Biology University of Minnesota St. Paul Minnesota.
Elizabeth C ChattRoy J. Carver Department of Biochemistry, Biophysics & Molecular Biology Center for Metabolic Biology Iowa State University Ames Iowa.
Peter M KlinkenbergDepartment of Plant & Microbial Biology University of Minnesota St. Paul Minnesota.
Nur-Aziatull Mohd-FadzilRoy J. Carver Department of Biochemistry, Biophysics & Molecular Biology Center for Metabolic Biology Iowa State University Ames Iowa.
Marshall HamptonDepartment of Mathematics & Statistics University of Minnesota Duluth Duluth Minnesota.
Basil J NikolauRoy J. Carver Department of Biochemistry, Biophysics & Molecular Biology Center for Metabolic Biology Iowa State University Ames Iowa.
Clay J CarterDepartment of Plant & Microbial Biology University of Minnesota St. Paul Minnesota.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nectar is the main reward that flowers offer to pollinators to entice repeated visitation.

Indexed as

Arabidopsis thalianaCucurbita peponectarnectariesnectary

Identifiers

PMID31245763
PMCPMC6508809

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.