Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36371210›Full record

ArticlePlant methods2022

MGIDI: a powerful tool to analyze plant multivariate data.

Tiago Olivoto, Maria I Diel, Denise Schmidt, Alessandro D Lúcio

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plant methods, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed
12.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 69 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Uncovering Phenotypic Variation in Common Bean (Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Tiago OlivotoDepartment of Plant Science, Federal University of Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC, 88034-000, Brazil. tiagoolivoto@gmail.com.
Maria I DielDepartament of Plant Science, Federal University of Pampa, Itaqui, RS, 97650-000, Brazil.
Denise SchmidtDepartament of Agronomic and Environmental Sciences, Federal University of Santa Maria, Frederico Westphalen, RS, 98400-000, Brazil.
Alessandro D LúcioDepartament of Plant Science, Federal University of Santa Maria, Santa Maria, RS, 97105-900, Brazil.
Universidade Federal de Santa Maria · BRUniversidade Federal de Santa Catarina · BRUniversidade Federal do Pampa · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCommonly, several traits are assessed in agronomic experiments to better understand the factors under study. However, it is also common to see that even when several traits are available, researchers opt to follow the easiest way by applying univariate analyses and post-hoc tests for mean comparison for each trait, which arouses the hypothesis that the benefits of a multi-trait framework analysis may have not been fully exploited in this area.

resultsIn this paper, we extended the theoretical foundations of the multi-trait genotype-ideotype distance index (MGIDI) to analyze multivariate data either in simple experiments (e.g., one-way layout with few treatments and traits) or complex experiments (e.g., with a factorial treatment structure). We proposed an optional weighting process that makes the ranking of treatments that stands out in traits with higher weights more likely. Its application is illustrated using (1) simulated data and (2) real data from a strawberry experiment that aims to select better factor combinations (namely, cultivar, transplant origin, and substrate mixture) based on the desired performance of 22 phenological, productive, physiological, and qualitative traits. Our results show that most of the strawberry traits are influenced by the cultivar, transplant origin, cultivation substrates, as well as by the interaction between cultivar and transplant origin. The MGIDI ranked the Albion cultivar originated from Imported transplants and the Camarosa cultivar originated from National transplants as the better factor combinations. The substrates with burned rice husk as the main component (70%) showed satisfactory physical proprieties, providing higher water use efficiency. The strengths and weakness view provided by the MGIDI revealed that looking for an ideal treatment should direct the efforts on increasing fruit production of Albion transplants from Imported origin. On the other hand, this treatment has strengths related to productive precocity, total soluble solids, and flesh firmness.

conclusionsOverall, this study opens the door to the use of MGIDI beyond the plant breeding context, providing a unique, practical, robust, and easy-to-handle multi-trait-based framework to analyze multivariate data. There is an exciting possibility for this to open up new avenues of research, mainly because using the MGIDI in future studies will dramatically reduce the number of tables/figures needed, serving as a powerful tool to guide researchers toward better treatment recommendations.

Indexed as

Fragaria ananassa DuschFruit qualityMGIDIMultivariate selectionOrganic substratesSubstrate cultivation

Identifiers

PMID36371210
PMCPMC9652799
OpenAlexW4309073595

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.