Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36186894›Full record

ArticlePlant direct2022

Automated imaging of duckweed growth and development.

Kevin L Cox, Jordan Manchego, Blake C Meyers, Kirk J Czymmek, Alex Harkess

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plant direct, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Photosynthesis in the Biomass Model SpeciesPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

5 authors.

Kevin L CoxDonald Danforth Plant Science Center St. Louis Missouri USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2524-8988
Jordan ManchegoHudsonAlpha Institute for Biotechnology Huntsville Alabama USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7766-3775
Blake C MeyersDonald Danforth Plant Science Center St. Louis Missouri USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3436-6097
Kirk J CzymmekDonald Danforth Plant Science Center St. Louis Missouri USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5471-7395
Alex HarkessHudsonAlpha Institute for Biotechnology Huntsville Alabama USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2035-0871

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Duckweeds are the smallest angiosperms, possessing a simple body architecture and highest rates of biomass accumulation. They can grow near-exponentially via clonal propagation. Understanding their reproductive biology, growth, and development is essential to unlock their potential for phytoremediation, carbon capture, and nutrition. However, there is a lack of non-laborious and convenient methods for spatially and temporally imaging an array of duckweed plants and growth conditions in the same experiment. We developed an automated microscopy approach to record time-lapse images of duckweed plants growing in 12-well cell culture plates. As a proof-of-concept experiment, we grew duckweed on semi-solid media with and without sucrose and monitored its effect on their growth over 3 days. Using the PlantCV toolkit, we quantified the thallus area of individual plantlets over time, and showed that

Indexed as

LemnamicroscopyPlantCVtime‐lapse

Identifiers

PMID36186894
PMCPMC9510441

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.