Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32699333›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2020

Growth and physiological responses of three warm-season legumes to water stress.

Gurjinder S Baath, Alexandre C Rocateli, Vijaya Gopal Kakani, Hardeep Singh, Brian K Northup, Prasanna H Gowda, Jhansy R Katta

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Drought Stress Response in Guar (Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. ContrastingFrontiers in plant science · 2022
    Article
  5. 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

7 authors.

Gurjinder S BaathDepartment of Plant and Soil Sciences, Oklahoma State University, 371 Agricultural Hall, Stillwater, OK, 74078, USA. gbaath@okstate.edu.
Alexandre C RocateliDepartment of Plant and Soil Sciences, Oklahoma State University, 371 Agricultural Hall, Stillwater, OK, 74078, USA.
Vijaya Gopal KakaniDepartment of Plant and Soil Sciences, Oklahoma State University, 371 Agricultural Hall, Stillwater, OK, 74078, USA.
Hardeep SinghDepartment of Plant and Soil Sciences, Oklahoma State University, 371 Agricultural Hall, Stillwater, OK, 74078, USA.
Brian K NorthupUSDA-ARS, Grazinglands Research Laboratory, 7207 W. Cheyenne St., El Reno, OK, 73036, USA.
Prasanna H GowdaUSDA-ARS, Southeast Area, 114 Experiment Station Road, Stoneville, MS, 38776, USA.
Jhansy R KattaDepartment of Plant and Soil Sciences, Oklahoma State University, 371 Agricultural Hall, Stillwater, OK, 74078, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Novel drought-tolerant grain legumes like mothbean (Vigna acontifolia), tepary bean (Phaseolus acutifolius), and guar (Cyamopsis tetragonoloba) may also serve as summer forages, and add resilience to agricultural systems in the Southern Great Plains (SGP). However, limited information on the comparative response of these species to different water regimes prevents identification of the most reliable option. This study was conducted to compare mothbean, tepary bean and guar for their vegetative growth and physiological responses to four different water regimes: 100% (control), and 75%, 50% and 25% of control, applied from 27 to 77 days after planting (DAP). Tepary bean showed the lowest stomatal conductance (g

Identifiers

PMID32699333
PMCPMC7376039

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.