Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38173926›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in plant science2023

Enhancing crop resilience by harnessing the synergistic effects of biostimulants against abiotic stress.

Anam Asif, Maratab Ali, Muslim Qadir, Rajmohan Karthikeyan, Zora Singh, Ravjit Khangura, Francesco Di Gioia, Zienab F R Ahmed

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review 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 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
28.2field-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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 71 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 5 countries.

Anam Asif *Integrative Agriculture, College of Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine, United Arab Emirates University, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
Maratab Ali *College of Agricultural Engineering and Food Science, Shandong University of Technology, Zibo, Shandong, China.
Muslim Qadir *Integrative Agriculture, College of Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine, United Arab Emirates University, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
Rajmohan KarthikeyanIntegrative Agriculture, College of Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine, United Arab Emirates University, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
Zora SinghHorticulture, School of Science, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, WA, Australia.
Ravjit KhanguraDepartment of Primary Industries and Regional Development, Government of Western Australia, Kensington, WA, Australia.
Francesco Di GioiaDepartment of Plant Science, College of Agricultural Sciences, The Pennsylvania State University, College State, PA, United States.
Zienab F R AhmedIntegrative Agriculture, College of Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine, United Arab Emirates University, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
United Arab Emirates University · AEEdith Cowan University · AUGovernment of Western Australia · AUPennsylvania State University · USUniversity of Management and Technology · PK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Plants experience constant exposed to diverse abiotic stresses throughout their growth and development stages. Given the burgeoning world population, abiotic stresses pose significant challenges to food and nutritional security. These stresses are complex and influenced by both genetic networks and environmental factors, often resulting in significant crop losses, which can reach as high as fifty percent. To mitigate the effects of abiotic stresses on crops, various strategies rooted in crop improvement and genomics are being explored. In particular, the utilization of biostimulants, including bio-based compounds derived from plants and beneficial microbes, has garnered considerable attention. Biostimulants offer the potential to reduce reliance on artificial chemical agents while enhancing nutritional efficiency and promoting plant growth under abiotic stress condition. Commonly used biostimulants, which are friendly to ecology and human health, encompass inorganic substances (e.g., zinc oxide and silicon) and natural substances (e.g., seaweed extracts, humic substances, chitosan, exudates, and microbes). Notably, prioritizing environmentally friendly biostimulants is crucial to prevent issues such as soil degradation, air and water pollution. In recent years, several studies have explored the biological role of biostimulants in plant production, focusing particularly on their mechanisms of effectiveness in horticulture. In this context, we conducted a comprehensive review of the existing scientific literature to analyze the current status and future research directions concerning the use of various biostimulants, such as plant-based zinc oxide, silicon, selenium and aminobutyric acid, seaweed extracts, humic acids, and chitosan for enhancing abiotic stress tolerance in crop plants. Furthermore, we correlated the molecular modifications induced by these biostimulants with different physiological pathways and assessed their impact on plant performance in response to abiotic stresses, which can provide valuable insights.

Indexed as

abiotic stressbio-based compoundsGABAmicroalgaeplants

Identifiers

PMID38173926
PMCPMC10764035
OpenAlexW4389917854

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.