ReviewMolecular ecology2026
Environmental Association Analyses in Plants and the Influence of Methodological Decisions.
Review in Molecular ecology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Climate change is predicted to impact existing ecological systems, leading to a requirement to improve our understanding of environmental adaptation in plants, particularly for conservation and the development of environmentally tolerant crop varieties. Environmental association analyses (EAAs) are a group of landscape genomic methods for detecting genetic markers or genes associated with environmental factors and therefore provide a top-down approach of studying the genetics of environmental adaptation. Here we review 138 EAA studies in plants, revealing the large diversity of methods at each stage of the analysis, including marker filtering, EAA model selection, the significance criteria used, candidate gene selection and any downstream analyses conducted. Following this, we compared four frequently used EAA models using genetic data from a panel of traditional rice (Oryza sativa) varieties from Vietnam, revealing a greater proportion of significant markers for recent GWAS models (FarmCPU and BLINK) compared to single locus mixed linear models (MLM) and latent factor mixed models (LFMM). Between zero and 22 environmentally associated markers overlapped between models and several genes in proximity to these loci have putative links to abiotic factors. Overall, this highlights the challenges in comparing the results of EAA studies, particularly regarding applying the results to crop breeding for future climates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.