ArticleFrontiers in plant science2023
Drought response of water-conserving and non-conserving spring barley cultivars.
Article in Frontiers in plant science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Genome-wide identification and expression analysis of Aspartic proteases in Hordeum vulagare L. reveals candidates involved in salt and drought tolerance.Protoplasma · 2026Article
- Tillering plasticity of drought-stressed barley genotypes under different re-watering regimes.BMC plant biology · 2025Article
- Modeling Study on Optimizing Water and Nitrogen Management for Barley in Marginal Soils.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- A missense mutation in the barley Xan-h gene encoding the Mg-chelatase subunit I leads to a viable pale green line with reduced daily transpiration rate.Plant cell reports · 2024Article
- Precision phenotyping of a barley diversity set reveals distinct drought response strategies.Frontiers in plant science · 2024Article
- Dynamic physiological response of tef to contrasting water availabilities.Frontiers in plant science · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Breeding barley cultivars adapted to drought requires in-depth knowledge on physiological drought responses. Methods: We used a high-throughput functional phenotyping platform to examine the response of four high-yielding European spring barley cultivars to a standardized drought treatment imposed around flowering. Results: Cv. Chanell showed a non-conserving water-use behavior with high transpiration and maximum productivity under well-watered conditions but rapid transpiration decrease under drought. The poor recovery upon re-irrigation translated to large yield losses. Cv. Baronesse showed the most water-conserving behavior, with the lowest pre-drought transpiration and the most gradual transpiration reduction under drought. Its good recovery (resilience) prevented large yield losses. Cv. Formula was less conserving than cv. Baronesse and produced low yet stable yields. Cv. RGT's dynamic water use with high transpiration under ample water supply and moderate transpiration decrease under drought combined with high resilience secured the highest and most stable yields. Discussion: Such a dynamic water-use behavior combined with higher drought resilience and favorable root traits could potentially create an ideotype for intermediate drought. Prospective studies will examine these results in field experiments and will use the newly gained understanding on water use in barley to improve process descriptions in crop simulation models to support crop model-aided ideotype design.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.