The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Plant responses to plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria
Open accessAbstract
Non-pathogenic soilborne microorganisms can promote plant growth, as well as suppress diseases. Plant growth promotion is taken to result from improved nutrient acquisition or hormonal stimulation. Disease suppression can occur through microbial antagonism or induction of resistance in the plant. Several rhizobacterial strains have been shown to act as plant growth-promoting bacteria through both stimulation of growth and induced systemic resistance (ISR), but it is not clear in how far both mechanisms are connected. Induced resistance is manifested as a reduction of the number of diseased plants or in disease severity upon subsequent infection by a pathogen. Such reduced disease susceptibility can be local or systemic, result from developmental or environmental factors and depend on multiple mechanisms. The spectrum of diseases to which PGPR-elicited ISR confers enhanced resistance overlaps partly with that of pathogen-induced systemic acquired resistance (SAR). Both ISR and SAR represent a state of enhanced basal resistance of the plant that depends on the signalling compounds jasmonic acid and salicylic acid, respectively, and pathogens are differentially sensitive to the resistances activated by each of these signalling pathways. Root-colonizing Pseudomonas bacteria have been shown to alter plant gene expression in roots and leaves to different extents, indicative of recognition of one or more bacterial determinants by specific plant receptors. Conversely, plants can alter root exudation and secrete compounds that interfere with quorum sensing (QS) regulation in the bacteria. Such two-way signalling resembles the interaction of root-nodulating Rhizobia with legumes and between mycorrhizal fungi and roots of the majority of plant species. Although ISR-eliciting rhizobacteria can induce typical early defence-related responses in cell suspensions, in plants they do not necessarily activate defence-related gene expression. Instead, they appear to act through priming of effective resistance mechanisms, as reflected by earlier and stronger defence reactions once infection occurs.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Bacterial Volatiles Induce Systemic Resistance in Arabidopsis
Ryu, C.-M., Farag, M. A., Hu, C.-H., Reddy, M. S., Kloepper, J. W., & Paré, P. W. (2004) · PLANT PHYSIOLOGY · doi:10.1104/pp.103.026583 · Cited by 1,308
The Arabidopsis genome: A foundation for plant research
Bevan, M., & Walsh, S. (2005) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.3723405 · Cited by 153
Cited by
Berg, G. (2009) · Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology · doi:10.1007/s00253-009-2092-7 · Cited by 1,648
Chen, X. H., Koumoutsi, A., Scholz, R., Eisenreich, A., Schneider, K., Heinemeyer, I., Morgenstern, B., Voss, B., Hess, W. R., Reva, O., et al. (2007) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt1325 · Cited by 873
Azospirillum: benefits that go far beyond biological nitrogen fixation
Fukami, J., Cerezini, P., & Hungria, M. (2018) · AMB Express · doi:10.1186/s13568-018-0608-1 · Cited by 624
Exploiting plant–microbe partnerships to improve biomass production and remediation
Weyens, N., van der Lelie, D., Taghavi, S., Newman, L., & Vangronsveld, J. (2009) · Trends in Biotechnology · doi:10.1016/j.tibtech.2009.07.006 · Cited by 592
Oleńska, E., Małek, W., Wójcik, M., Swiecicka, I., Thijs, S., & Vangronsveld, J. (2020) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140682 · Cited by 555
Metadata
- Authors
- van Loon, L. C.
- Venue
- European Journal of Plant Pathology
- Published
- 2007-06-05
- Volume
- 119
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 243-254
- ISSN
- 0929-1873 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-8469
- OpenAlex
- W2105326716
- Cited by
- 913
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 25.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: Plant responses to plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s10658-007-9165-1
- The paper
- van Loon, L. C. (2007). Plant responses to plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria. European Journal of Plant Pathology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10658-007-9165-1
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.