ReviewHeliyon2024
Photoperiodic and lighting treatments for flowering control and its genetic regulation in sugarcane breeding.
Review in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Revisiting the Molecular Roadmap for Sugar Crops: Genome Reading, Trait Writing and Variety Redesigning.Plant biotechnology journal · 2026Review
- Effects of continuous light and skeleton photoperiods on photosynthesis and circadian rhythm in celery.Biotechnology letters · 2026Article
- Recent Advances in Sugarcane Leaf Scald Disease: Pathogenic Insights and Sustainable Management Approaches.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Improvement of sugarcane is hampered due to its narrow genetic base, and the difficulty in synchronizing flowering further hinders the exploitation of the genetic potential of available germplasm resources. Therefore, the continuous evaluation and optimization of flowering control and induction techniques are vital for sugarcane improvement. In view of this, the review was conducted to investigate the current understanding of photoperiodic and lighting treatment effects on sugarcane flowering and its genetic regulation. Photoperiod facilities have made a significant contribution to flowering control in sugarcane; however, inductive photoperiods are still unknown for some genotypes, and some intended crosses are still impossible to produce because of unresponsive varieties. The effectiveness of lower red/far-red ratios in promoting sugarcane flowering has been widely understood. Furthermore, there is vast potential for utilizing blue, red, and far-red light wavelengths in the flowering control of sugarcane. In this context, light-emitting diodes (LEDs) remain efficient sources of light. Therefore, the combined use of photoperiod regimes with different light wavelengths and optimization of such treatment combinations might help to control and induce flowering in sugarcane parental clones. In sugarcane,
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.