Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36241928›Full record

ReviewApplied microbiology and biotechnology2022

Advancements and prospectives of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) biotechnology.

Tsama Subrahmanyeswari, Saikat Gantait

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Applied microbiology and biotechnology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

2 authors.

Tsama Subrahmanyeswari *Crop Research Unit (Genetics and Plant Breeding), Faculty of Agriculture, Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavidyalaya, Nadia, Mohanpur, West Bengal, 741252, India.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1830-4021
Saikat Gantait *Crop Research Unit (Genetics and Plant Breeding), Faculty of Agriculture, Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavidyalaya, Nadia, Mohanpur, West Bengal, 741252, India. saikatgantait@yahoo.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5059-2428

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) is the second largest sugar-producing crop (following sugarcane), accounting around 40% of total global sugar output. It has been reckoned with huge contribution in sugar, ethanol, and fodder industries. Since sugar beet is recalcitrant in nature, to address the multifaceted difficulties associated with its conventional propagation, several biotechnological tools and techniques aiming with in vitro-based mass regeneration-cum-genetic enhancement are becoming popular. The implementation of effective methodology for in vitro regeneration from ex vitro explant sources becomes the necessity for successful commercial-scale clonal propagation and genetic modification. Substantial research achievements have been made in the past few decades in connection to the optimization of in vitro protocols for direct and callus-mediated regeneration, homozygous line production, somatic hybridization, and genetic transformation of sugar beet. The current review summarizes several reported findings on various physio-chemical factors responsible for direct, indirect organogenesis, somatic embryogenesis, protoplast culture, haploid culture, acclimatization accountable for plantlet mass multiplication, assessing the genetic integrity of in vitro-cultured plantlets, and, finally, successful transgenic approaches to remediate biotic and abiotic stresses. Furthermore, this study highlights undiscovered regions, research gaps, and major bottlenecks that might be considered in developing significant innovative ideas related to sugar beet biotechnology in the near future. KEY POINTS: • Sugar beet, the second largest sugar producer, is a major contributor in sugar, ethanol, and fodder industries. • Current review comprehensively evaluates diverse factors influencing the success of in vitro biotechnological interventions. • This review further highlights the research gaps and offers way outs to attain comprehensive genetic improvement.

Indexed as

Beta vulgarisBiotechnologyEthanolProspective StudiesSugarsEthanolSugarsAcclimatizationClonal fidelityDouble haploidMicropropagationProtoplast cultureSomatic embryogenesisTransgenic

Identifiers

PMID36241928

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.