Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39856113›Full record

ReviewNature communications2025

Application of machine learning and genomics for orphan crop improvement.

Tessa R MacNish, Monica F Danilevicz, Philipp E Bayer, Mitchell S Bestry, David Edwards

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nature communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Omics landscapes in molecular mechanisms withFood chemistry. Molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
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

5 authors.

Tessa R MacNish *School of Biological Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0008-8985-7348
Monica F Danilevicz *School of Biological Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.
Philipp E BayerCentre for Applied Bioinformatics, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.
Mitchell S BestrySchool of Biological Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.
David EdwardsSchool of Biological Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia. dave.edwards@uwa.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7599-6760

Funding

Department of Education and Training | Australian Research Council (ARC) DP200100762Department of Education and Training | Australian Research Council (ARC) DP210100296Department of Education and Training | Australian Research Council (ARC) LP230100351
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Orphan crops are important sources of nutrition in developing regions and many are tolerant to biotic and abiotic stressors; however, modern crop improvement technologies have not been widely applied to orphan crops due to the lack of resources available. There are orphan crop representatives across major crop types and the conservation of genes between these related species can be used in crop improvement. Machine learning (ML) has emerged as a promising tool for crop improvement. Transferring knowledge from major crops to orphan crops and using machine learning to improve accuracy and efficiency can be used to improve orphan crops.

Indexed as

Crops, AgriculturalGenomicsMachine LearningPlant Breeding

Identifiers

PMID39856113
PMCPMC11760368

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.