Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35453685›Full record

ArticleBiology2022

Reaping the Potential of Wild

Shivali Sharma, Jagdish Jaba, Polneni Jaganmohan Rao, Suraj Prasad, Nammi Tripura Venkata Venu Gopal, Hari Chand Sharma, Benjamin Kilian

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Article
  4. 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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Shivali SharmaInternational Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Patancheru 502324, Telangana, India.ORCID 0000-0001-5314-484X
Jagdish JabaInternational Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Patancheru 502324, Telangana, India.ORCID 0000-0002-4834-8845
Polneni Jaganmohan RaoRegional Agricultural Research Station, Professor Jayashankar Telangana State Agricultural University, Warangal 500030, Telangana, India.
Suraj PrasadInternational Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Patancheru 502324, Telangana, India.
Nammi Tripura Venkata Venu GopalInternational Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Patancheru 502324, Telangana, India.
Hari Chand SharmaInternational Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Patancheru 502324, Telangana, India.
Benjamin KilianGlobal Crop Diversity Trust, 53113 Bonn, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-9145-6980
International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics · INGlobal Crop Diversity TrustProfessor Jayashankar Telangana State Agricultural University · IN

Funding

Global Crop Diversity Trust GS18010
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pod borer (Helicoverpa armigera) causes the highest yield losses in pigeonpea, followed by pod fly (Melanagromyza obtusa). High levels of resistance to pod borer are not available in the cultivated genepool. Several accessions of wild Cajanus species with strong resistance, and different resistance mechanisms (antixenosis and antibiosis) to pod borer have been identified. These accessions can be utilized to improve the pod borer resistance of cultivated pigeonpea. Using pod borer resistant Cajanus scarabaeoides and Cajanus acutifolius as pollen donors and popular pigeonpea varieties as recipients, pre-breeding populations were developed following simple- and complex-cross approaches. Preliminary evaluation of four backcross populations consisting of >2300 introgression lines (ILs) under un-sprayed field conditions resulted in identifying 156 ILs with low visual damage rating scores (5.0−6.0) and low pod borer damage (<50%). Precise re-screening of these ILs over different locations and years resulted in the identification of 21 ILs having improved resistance to pod borer. Because these ILs were derived from wild Cajanus species, they may contain different alleles for different resistance components to pod borer. Hence, these ILs are ready-to-use novel and diverse sources of pod borer resistance that can be utilized for improving the pod borer resistance of cultivated pigeonpea.

Indexed as

biochemical compoundsbiotic stressesHelicoverpapigeonpeapod borerpre-breedingtrichomeswild Cajanus

Identifiers

PMID35453685
PMCPMC9026160
OpenAlexW4220837005

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.