ArticleBMC plant biology2025
Tillering plasticity of drought-stressed barley genotypes under different re-watering regimes.
Article in BMC plant biology, 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.
- Growth responses of spring barley to varying levels of drought priming.Frontiers in plant science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOne future challenge of agriculture will be maintaining food security in times of climate change. Future plant breeding, therefore, has to account for the genotypes’ survival during drought and a good recovery ability after rainfall events. We aimed at investigating the re-tillering behavior of selected barley genotypes (cultivars and wild barley introgression lines) in different drought and re-watering scenarios, which were applied in a high-throughput phenotyping facility. Re-tillering describes the activation of additional tillers after post-stress irrigation.
resultsTwenty-three selected genotypes of the barley NAM population HEB-25, along with three control genotypes, were evaluated in four replicates under five distinct treatment conditions. In this experiment, re-tillering was particularly pronounced in an alternating watering and stress treatment, where the resumption of irrigation post-stress enabled full recovery of the plants. However, it was noted that while re-watering after a stress period promotes tiller activation and the development of fertile ears, it also tends to increase the number of sterile ears. The degree of sterile ear formation varied significantly among different genotypes, highlighting the critical role of genetic factors in modulating plant responses to re-tillering and post-stress irrigation. It is important to note that excessive re-tillering has been shown to exhibit a negative correlation with fertile ear weight.
conclusionsThe impact of focusing on tiller number and re-tillering behavior in future barley breeding may be significant, particularly in the context of climate change. By selecting for genotypes with appropriate tillering plasticity, breeders can develop barley varieties that are more resilient to stress conditions such as drought.
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.