ArticleBotanical studies2025
Identification of hotspots of crop wild relatives in Germany to promote their in situ conservation in a network of genetic reserves.
Article in Botanical studies, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Crop wild relatives of legumes: evolutionary resources for climate-responsive pre-breeding.Frontiers in plant science · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCrop wild relatives (CWR) represent a valuable resource for ensuring food security. Although they are negatively affected by the loss of habitats due to climate change and land use change, they are underrepresented in conservation programmes. The establishment of genetic reserve (GR) networks has been put forward as an approach to protect CWR. The objective of this study was to identify CWR hotspots in Germany, which are suitable candidates for the establishment of GRs. CWR observation data were collected on a national scale from various sources and a hotspot analysis was performed to identify potential GR sites. A number of these sites were visited and the plant species occurring were recorded.
results76 GR candidate sites were identified. The sites are distributed across the biogeographic regions of Germany and could conserve 73% of all CWR and 85% of the CWR that were assigned a conservation priority for Germany. Our on-site surveys for 27 GR candidates found discrepancies between the species records available and the species currently occurring.
conclusionsWe propose five hectares as an appropriate size for GRs, as such an area can be monitored and the number of stakeholders involved is usually low. The discrepancies concerning species records highlight the need for more frequent, regular nationwide CWR monitoring as a prerequisite for their conservation. Our results further suggest that GRs should also be set up outside of protected areas to protect CWR efficiently.
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.