Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35951179›Full record

ReviewMethods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.)2022

Overview of Somatic Embryogenesis.

Marco A Ramírez-Mosqueda

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Transcriptome and Gene Expression Analysis RevealedInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Regenerating Saffron (Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    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

1 author.

Marco A Ramírez-MosquedaFacultad de Ciencias Biológicas y Agropecuarias, Universidad Veracruzana, Amatlán de los Reyes, Veracruz, Mexico. marcoramirez02@uv.mx.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Somatic embryogenesis is a natural phenomenon through which somatic embryos are produced from somatic cells although. It is considered the most efficient morphogenic pathways for plant multiplication. One of the key features of somatic embryogenesis is the use of cellular totipotency, where dedifferentiation is induced to foster cell proliferation, followed by the induction of differentiation using plant growth regulators to produce new plants. There is a cell group with the potential to undergo the somatic embryogenesis pathway through adequate stimulation (plant growth regulators, incubation conditions, and supplementation of the culture medium). There are two somatic embryogenesis pathways in plants: direct and indirect embryogenesis. Direct somatic embryogenesis consists of the formation of embryos directly from isolated cells, without the formation of "callous" tissue. Indirect somatic embryogenesis is characterized by the formation of a callus as a stage that precedes the formation of somatic embryos. It should be stressed that not all plant cells have this morphogenic capacity; consequently, determining the type of factors that drive this type of response has been challenging. This book provides the reader with updated available information on the techniques, relevant protocols, and tools to perform somatic embryogenesis in different plant species for economic purposes.

Indexed as

Plant Growth RegulatorsPlant Somatic Embryogenesis TechniquesCulture MediaEmbryonic DevelopmentPlantsCulture MediaPlant Growth RegulatorsConversionDevelopmental PathwayEmbryo TypeMorphogenic DevelopmentSomaclonal Variation

Identifiers

PMID35951179

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.