Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33584752›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in plant science2020

Past and Future of Plant Stress Detection: An Overview From Remote Sensing to Positron Emission Tomography.

Angelica Galieni, Nicola D'Ascenzo, Fabio Stagnari, Giancarlo Pagnani, Qingguo Xie, Michele Pisante

Abstract 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 49 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing 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

49 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  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

6 authors.

Angelica GalieniResearch Centre for Vegetable and Ornamental Crops, Council for Agricultural Research and Economics, Monsampolo del Tronto, Italy.
Nicola D'AscenzoSchool of Life Science and Technology, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Fabio StagnariFaculty of Bioscience and Technology for Food, Agriculture and Environment, University of Teramo, Teramo, Italy.
Giancarlo PagnaniFaculty of Bioscience and Technology for Food, Agriculture and Environment, University of Teramo, Teramo, Italy.
Qingguo XieSchool of Life Science and Technology, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Michele PisanteFaculty of Bioscience and Technology for Food, Agriculture and Environment, University of Teramo, Teramo, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Plant stress detection is considered one of the most critical areas for the improvement of crop yield in the compelling worldwide scenario, dictated by both the climate change and the geopolitical consequences of the Covid-19 epidemics. A complicated interconnection of biotic and abiotic stressors affect plant growth, including water, salt, temperature, light exposure, nutrients availability, agrochemicals, air and soil pollutants, pests and diseases. In facing this extended panorama, the technology choice is manifold. On the one hand, quantitative methods, such as metabolomics, provide very sensitive indicators of most of the stressors, with the drawback of a disruptive approach, which prevents follow up and dynamical studies. On the other hand qualitative methods, such as fluorescence, thermography and VIS/NIR reflectance, provide a non-disruptive view of the action of the stressors in plants, even across large fields, with the drawback of a poor accuracy. When looking at the spatial scale, the effect of stress may imply modifications from DNA level (nanometers) up to cell (micrometers), full plant (millimeters to meters), and entire field (kilometers). While quantitative techniques are sensitive to the smallest scales, only qualitative approaches can be used for the larger ones. Emerging technologies from nuclear and medical physics, such as computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography, are expected to bridge the gap of quantitative non-disruptive morphologic and functional measurements at larger scale. In this review we analyze the landscape of the different technologies nowadays available, showing the benefits of each approach in plant stress detection, with a particular focus on the gaps, which will be filled in the nearby future by the emerging nuclear physics approaches to agriculture.

Indexed as

fluorescence imagingmetabolomicsplant imagingplant positron emission tomographyplant stressremote sensingspectroscopythermal imaging

Identifiers

PMID33584752
PMCPMC7873487

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.