ReviewPhysiologia plantarum
Imaging of Molecular and Developmental Responses to Abiotic Stresses in Reproductive Tissues.
Review in Physiologia plantarum. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrating multi-omics approaches to shape legume root system architecture under drought stress: a comprehensive review.Frontiers in plant science · 2026Review
- Imaging of Molecular and Developmental Responses to Abiotic Stresses in Reproductive Tissues.Physiologia plantarumReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Abiotic stresses, such as drought, salinity, and extreme temperatures, have profound effects on plant reproduction, often leading to reduced fertility and yield. Reproduction in plants involves complex interactions between diverse cells, necessitating spatiotemporal resolution to understand how stress impacts each component of this intricate system. Imaging techniques have emerged as indispensable tools for uncovering the cellular and molecular responses of reproductive tissues to abiotic stresses in Arabidopsis and crops. Advanced methods, including fluorescence-based dyes and genetically encoded biosensors, have enabled the visualization of key stress-associated molecules such as reactive oxygen species and calcium ions. These approaches reveal the dynamic and localized nature of stress responses. Additionally, state-of-the-art imaging technologies, including light-sheet microscopy, structured illumination (e.g., Apotome), high-content confocal microscopy, micro-computed tomography, and custom heated-stage setups, provide varying levels of spatial and temporal resolution to study stress-induced changes in tissue morphology and development. Complementary techniques like sectioning and staining continue to yield critical insights into the anatomical and developmental alterations under stress conditions. This review integrates findings from these methodologies, highlighting their contributions to our understanding of abiotic stress responses in male and female reproductive tissues. Furthermore, we identify technological advancements needed to enable real-time, (sub)cellular-level imaging of stress responses. Finally, we compile a list of promoter-based identity markers specific to reproductive tissues across different crop species, offering a resource for targeted genetic studies. By bridging current imaging techniques with biological insights and technological gaps, this work aims to advance the field of plant stress biology and reproductive resilience.
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.