Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34579308›Full record

ArticlePlants (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Comparative Transcriptomics of Non-Embryogenic and Embryogenic Callus in Semi-Recalcitrant and Non-Recalcitrant Upland Cotton Lines.

Sonika Kumar, Ashleigh Ruggles, Sam Logan, Alora Mazarakis, Thomas Tyson, Matthew Bates, Clayton Grosse, David Reed, Zhigang Li, Jane Grimwood and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plants (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. CRISPR-Cas9-Mediated Knockout ofPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Embryogenic Stem Cell Identity after Protoplast Isolation fromInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

12 authors.

Sonika KumarDepartment of Plant and Environmental Sciences, Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634, USA.
Ashleigh RugglesTechshot Inc., Greenville, IN 47124, USA.
Sam LoganTechshot Inc., Greenville, IN 47124, USA.
Alora MazarakisTechshot Inc., Greenville, IN 47124, USA.
Thomas TysonTechshot Inc., Greenville, IN 47124, USA.
Matthew BatesTechshot Inc., Greenville, IN 47124, USA.
Clayton GrosseTechshot Inc., Greenville, IN 47124, USA.
David ReedTechshot Inc., Greenville, IN 47124, USA.
Zhigang LiDepartment of Plant and Environmental Sciences, Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3823-9845
Jane GrimwoodHudsonAlpha Institute for Biotechnology, Huntsville, AL 35806, USA.
Jeremy SchmutzHudsonAlpha Institute for Biotechnology, Huntsville, AL 35806, USA.
Christopher SaskiDepartment of Plant and Environmental Sciences, Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634, USA.

Funding

Center for the Advancement of Science in Space GA-2019-007NASA Headquarters GA-2019-007
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Somatic embryogenesis-mediated plant regeneration is essential for the genetic manipulation of agronomically important traits in upland cotton. Genotype specific recalcitrance to regeneration is a primary challenge in deploying genome editing and incorporating useful transgenes into elite cotton germplasm. In this study, transcriptomes of a semi-recalcitrant cotton (

Indexed as

genotype-specific recalcitranceGossypium hirsutum L.reprogrammingsomatic embryogenesis

Identifiers

PMID34579308
PMCPMC8472754

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.