Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41090094›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in plant science2025

Current methods and future needs for visible and non-visible detection of plant stress responses.

Julian Cooper, Kevin Propst, Cory D Hirsch

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in plant science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. 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

3 authors.

Julian CooperDepartment of Plant Pathology, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN, United States.
Kevin PropstDepartment of Plant Pathology, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN, United States.
Cory D HirschDepartment of Plant Pathology, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As climate change alters the frequency, intensity, and co-occurrences of abiotic and biotic stresses, the effective and efficient detection of plant stress responses and resistance mechanisms is critical for safeguarding global food security. Stressful environments elicit both visible and non-visible changes in plants. Cellular and subcellular changes, often invisible to the naked eye, can serve as indicators of stress and can be quantified using molecular, ionomic, metabolomic, genomic, and transcriptomic methods. In contrast, visible responses such as discoloration, morphological changes, and disease symptoms can be monitored efficiently through atmospheric, aerial, and terrestrial remote sensing platforms. Phenotyping at the whole-plant and organ levels offers valuable insights for diagnosing stress

Indexed as

machine learningmulti-omicsphenotypingremote sensingstress detection

Identifiers

PMID41090094
PMCPMC12515932

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.