Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31673278›Full record

ArticlePlant methods2019

An efficient and reproducible

Sadiye Hayta, Mark A Smedley, Selcen U Demir, Robert Blundell, Alison Hinchliffe, Nicola Atkinson, Wendy A Harwood

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plant methods, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 67 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
67citing 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

67 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Progress and innovations of gene cloning in wheat and its close relatives.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2025
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Frontiers in plant science · 2025
    Review
  20. Review

7 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Sadiye HaytaDepartment of Crop Genetics, John Innes Centre, Norwich Research Park, Norwich, Norfolk NR4 7UH UK.
Mark A SmedleyDepartment of Crop Genetics, John Innes Centre, Norwich Research Park, Norwich, Norfolk NR4 7UH UK.
Selcen U DemirDepartment of Crop Genetics, John Innes Centre, Norwich Research Park, Norwich, Norfolk NR4 7UH UK.
Robert BlundellDepartment of Crop Genetics, John Innes Centre, Norwich Research Park, Norwich, Norfolk NR4 7UH UK.
Alison HinchliffeDepartment of Crop Genetics, John Innes Centre, Norwich Research Park, Norwich, Norfolk NR4 7UH UK.
Nicola AtkinsonDepartment of Crop Genetics, John Innes Centre, Norwich Research Park, Norwich, Norfolk NR4 7UH UK.
Wendy A HarwoodDepartment of Crop Genetics, John Innes Centre, Norwich Research Park, Norwich, Norfolk NR4 7UH UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite wheat being a worldwide staple, it is still considered the most difficult to transform out of the main cereal crops. Therefore, for the wheat research community, a freely available and effective wheat transformation system is still greatly needed.

resultsWe have developed and optimised a reproducible

conclusionWe reported here a high-throughput, highly efficient and repeatable transformation system for wheat and this system has been used successfully to introduce genes of interest, for RNAi, over-expression and for CRISPR-Cas9 based genome editing.

Indexed as

Agrobacterium tumefaciensGenetic modificationImmature embryoTriticum aestivumWheat

Identifiers

PMID31673278
PMCPMC6815027

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.