Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 334

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Deviation from the grain protein concentration–grain yield negative relationship is highly correlated to post-anthesis N uptake in winter wheat

Open access
Bogard, Matthieu, Allard, Vincent, Brancourt-Hulmel, Maryse, Heumez, Emmanuel, Machet, Jean-Marie, Jeuffroy, Marie-Hélène, Gate, Philippe, Martre, Pierre, Le Gouis, Jacques·2010·Journal of Experimental Botany
DOI 10.1093/jxb/erq238
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

In plants, carbon and nitrogen (N) economies are intimately linked at the physiological and biochemical level. The strong genetic negative correlation between grain yield and grain protein concentration observed in various cereals is an illustration of this inter-relationship. Studies have shown that deviation from this negative relationship (grain protein deviation or GPD) has a genetic basis, but its physiological basis is still poorly understood. This study analysed data on 27 genotypes grown in multienvironment field trials, representing a wide range of agricultural practices and climatic conditions. The objective was to identify physiological processes related to the genetic variability in GPD. Under most environments, GPD was significantly related to post-anthesis N uptake independently of anthesis date and total N at anthesis. The underlying physiological trait might be related to genotypic differences in either access to soil N, regulation of N uptake by plant N status, or ability to maintain root activity during the grain-filling period. GPD is an interesting potential target in breeding as it appears to be relatively robust across different environments and would be valuable in increasing total N uptake by maturity.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/jxb/erq238

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 30 references

Cited by

See all 334

Metadata

Authors
Bogard, M., Allard, V., Brancourt-Hulmel, M., Heumez, E., Machet, J.-M., Jeuffroy, M.-H., Gate, P., Martre, P., & Le Gouis, J.
Venue
Journal of Experimental Botany
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2010-08-02
Volume
61
Issue
15
Pages
4303-4312
ISSN
  • 0022-0957 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2431
DOI
10.1093/jxb/erq238
OpenAlex
W2112100784
Cited by
334
References
30
FWCI
17.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Deviation from the grain protein concentration–grain yield negative relationship is highly correlated to post-anthesis N uptake in winter wheat. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jxb/erq238
The paper
Bogard, M., Allard, V., Brancourt-Hulmel, M., Heumez, E., Machet, J.-M., Jeuffroy, M.-H., Gate, P., Martre, P., & Le Gouis, J. (2010). Deviation from the grain protein concentration–grain yield negative relationship is highly correlated to post-anthesis N uptake in winter wheat. Journal of Experimental Botany. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erq238

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.