Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32184798›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in plant science2020

Adaptation of Foxtail Millet (

Faisal Nadeem, Zeeshan Ahmad, Mahmood Ul Hassan, Ruifeng Wang, Xianmin Diao, Xuexian Li

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in plant science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
10.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 80 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Role of Millets for Food Security Under Climate Change.Plant-environment interactions (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. MainstreamingBiodiversity and conservation · 2021
    Review
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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Faisal NadeemMOE Key Laboratory of Plant-Soil Interactions, Department of Plant Nutrition, China Agricultural University, Beijing, China.
Zeeshan AhmadMOE Key Laboratory of Plant-Soil Interactions, Department of Plant Nutrition, China Agricultural University, Beijing, China.
Mahmood Ul HassanMOE Key Laboratory of Plant-Soil Interactions, Department of Plant Nutrition, China Agricultural University, Beijing, China.
Ruifeng WangMOE Key Laboratory of Plant-Soil Interactions, Department of Plant Nutrition, China Agricultural University, Beijing, China.
Xianmin DiaoInstitute of Crop Sciences, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing, China.
Xuexian LiMOE Key Laboratory of Plant-Soil Interactions, Department of Plant Nutrition, China Agricultural University, Beijing, China.
China Agricultural University · CNChinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Amongst various environmental constraints, abiotic stresses are increasing the risk of food insecurity worldwide by limiting crop production and disturbing the geographical distribution of food crops. Millets are known to possess unique features of resilience to adverse environments, especially infertile soil conditions, although the underlying mechanisms are yet to be determined. The small diploid genome, short stature, excellent seed production, C

Indexed as

abiotic stressesfoxtail milletnitrogen limitationphosphate starvationtransporter

Identifiers

PMID32184798
PMCPMC7058660
OpenAlexW3007246644

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.