Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36984894›Full record

ReviewMetabolites2023

Data Science and Plant Metabolomics.

Anna Kisiel, Adrianna Krzemińska, Danuta Cembrowska-Lech, Tymoteusz Miller

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Metabolites, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Plant Metabolomics: Current Initiatives and Future Prospects.Current issues in molecular biology · 2023
    Review
  5. Investigating the Metabolism of Plants Germinated in Heavy Water, DInternational journal of molecular sciences · 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

4 authors.

Anna KisielInstitute of Marine and Environmental Sciences, University of Szczecin, Wąska 13, 71-415 Szczecin, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-1486-1093
Adrianna KrzemińskaPolish Society of Bioinformatics and Data Science BIODATA, Popiełuszki 4c, 71-214 Szczecin, Poland.
Danuta Cembrowska-LechPolish Society of Bioinformatics and Data Science BIODATA, Popiełuszki 4c, 71-214 Szczecin, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-1503-0064
Tymoteusz MillerInstitute of Marine and Environmental Sciences, University of Szczecin, Wąska 13, 71-415 Szczecin, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-5962-5334

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The study of plant metabolism is one of the most complex tasks, mainly due to the huge amount and structural diversity of metabolites, as well as the fact that they react to changes in the environment and ultimately influence each other. Metabolic profiling is most often carried out using tools that include mass spectrometry (MS), which is one of the most powerful analytical methods. All this means that even when analyzing a single sample, we can obtain thousands of data. Data science has the potential to revolutionize our understanding of plant metabolism. This review demonstrates that machine learning, network analysis, and statistical modeling are some techniques being used to analyze large quantities of complex data that provide insights into plant development, growth, and how they interact with their environment. These findings could be key to improving crop yields, developing new forms of plant biotechnology, and understanding the relationship between plants and microbes. It is also necessary to consider the constraints that come with data science such as quality and availability of data, model complexity, and the need for deep knowledge of the subject in order to achieve reliable outcomes.

Indexed as

data sciencemachine learningplant metabolites

Identifiers

PMID36984894
PMCPMC10054611

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.