Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33763099›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in plant science2021

Engineered Orange Ectopically Expressing the Arabidopsis β-Caryophyllene Synthase Is Not Attractive to

Berta Alquézar, Haroldo Xavier Linhares Volpe, Rodrigo Facchini Magnani, Marcelo Pedreira de Miranda, Mateus Almeida Santos, Viviani Vieira Marques, Márcia Rodrigues de Almeida, Nelson Arno Wulff, Hieng-Ming Ting, Michel de Vries and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in plant science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Semiochemicals and odorant receptors underlying potato cultivar susceptibility and resistance to potato tuber moth.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. 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

13 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Berta AlquézarLaboratório de Biotecnologia Vegetal, Pesquisa & Desenvolvimento, Fundo de Defesa da Citricultura (Fundecitrus), Araraquara, Brazil.
Haroldo Xavier Linhares VolpeLaboratório de Biotecnologia Vegetal, Pesquisa & Desenvolvimento, Fundo de Defesa da Citricultura (Fundecitrus), Araraquara, Brazil.
Rodrigo Facchini MagnaniLaboratório de Biotecnologia Vegetal, Pesquisa & Desenvolvimento, Fundo de Defesa da Citricultura (Fundecitrus), Araraquara, Brazil.
Marcelo Pedreira de MirandaLaboratório de Biotecnologia Vegetal, Pesquisa & Desenvolvimento, Fundo de Defesa da Citricultura (Fundecitrus), Araraquara, Brazil.
Mateus Almeida SantosLaboratório de Biotecnologia Vegetal, Pesquisa & Desenvolvimento, Fundo de Defesa da Citricultura (Fundecitrus), Araraquara, Brazil.
Viviani Vieira MarquesLaboratório de Biotecnologia Vegetal, Pesquisa & Desenvolvimento, Fundo de Defesa da Citricultura (Fundecitrus), Araraquara, Brazil.
Márcia Rodrigues de AlmeidaLaboratório de Biotecnologia Vegetal, Pesquisa & Desenvolvimento, Fundo de Defesa da Citricultura (Fundecitrus), Araraquara, Brazil.
Nelson Arno WulffLaboratório de Biotecnologia Vegetal, Pesquisa & Desenvolvimento, Fundo de Defesa da Citricultura (Fundecitrus), Araraquara, Brazil.
Hieng-Ming TingInstitute of Plant Biology, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Michel de VriesSwammerdam Institute for Life Sciences, Green Life Sciences Cluster, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Robert SchuurinkSwammerdam Institute for Life Sciences, Green Life Sciences Cluster, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Harro BouwmeesterSwammerdam Institute for Life Sciences, Green Life Sciences Cluster, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Leandro PeñaLaboratório de Biotecnologia Vegetal, Pesquisa & Desenvolvimento, Fundo de Defesa da Citricultura (Fundecitrus), Araraquara, Brazil.
Fundo de Defesa da Citricultura · BRUniversity of Amsterdam · NLUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) · BRNational Taiwan University · TWUniversidade Federal de São Carlos · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Huanglongbing (HLB) is a destructive disease, associated with psyllid-transmitted phloem-restricted pathogenic bacteria, which is seriously endangering citriculture worldwide. It affects all citrus species and cultivars regardless of the rootstock used, and despite intensive research in the last decades, there is no effective cure to control either the bacterial species (

Indexed as

Asian citrus psyllidbiotechnologychemical ecologyCitrus sinensisHLBsesquiterpenestransgenicvolatiles

Identifiers

PMID33763099
PMCPMC7982956
OpenAlexW3135731984

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.