The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Cultivation-independent population analysis of bacterial endophytes in three potato varieties based on eubacterial and Actinomycetes-specific PCR of 16S rRNA genes
Abstract
Abstract Endophytic bacteria are ubiquitous in most plants and colonise plants without exhibiting pathogenicity. Studies on the diversity of bacterial endophytes have been mainly approached by characterisation of isolates obtained from internal tissues. Despite the broad application of culture-independent techniques for the analysis of microbial communities in a wide range of natural habitats, little information is available on the species diversity of endophytes. In this study, microbial communities inhabiting stems, roots and tubers of three potato varieties were analysed by 16S rRNA-based techniques such as terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis, denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis as well as 16S rDNA cloning and sequencing. Two individual plant experiments were conducted. In the first experiment plants suffered from light deficiency, whereas healthy and robust plants were obtained in the second experiment. Plants obtained from both experiments showed comparable endophytic populations, but healthy potato plants possessed a significantly higher diversity of endophytes than stressed plants. In addition, plant tissue and variety specific endophytes were detected. Sequence analysis of 16S rRNA genes indicated that a broad phylogenetic spectrum of bacteria is able to colonise plants internally including alpha-, beta-, and gamma-Proteobacteria, high-GC Gram-positives, microbes belonging to the Flexibacter/Cytophaga/Bacteroides group and Planctomycetales. Group-specific analysis of Actinomycetes indicated a higher abundance and diversity of Streptomyces scabiei-related species in the variety Mehlige Mühlviertler, which is known for its resistance against potato common scab caused by S. scabiei.
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
Evolution of Protein Molecules
JUKES, T. H., & CANTOR, C. R. (1969) · Mammalian Protein Metabolism · doi:10.1016/b978-1-4832-3211-9.50009-7 · Cited by 11,032
Cited by
Compant, S., Clément, C., & Sessitsch, A. (2010) · Soil Biology and Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2009.11.024 · Cited by 2,318
Self-citationPlant beneficial endophytic bacteria: Mechanisms, diversity, host range and genetic determinants
Afzal, I., Shinwari, Z. K., Sikandar, S., & Shahzad, S. (2019) · Microbiological Research · doi:10.1016/j.micres.2019.02.001 · Cited by 1,010
Beneficial role of bacterial endophytes in heavy metal phytoremediation
Ma, Y., Rajkumar, M., Zhang, C., & Freitas, H. (2016) · Journal of Environmental Management · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.02.047 · Cited by 684
Phyllosphere microbiology with special reference to diversity and plant genotype
Whipps, J. M., Hand, P., Pink, D., & Bending, G. D. (2008) · Journal of Applied Microbiology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2672.2008.03906.x · Cited by 532
Plant–bacteria partnerships for the remediation of hydrocarbon contaminated soils
Khan, S., Afzal, M., Iqbal, S., & Khan, Q. M. (2013) · Chemosphere · doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2012.09.045 · Cited by 411
Metadata
- Authors
- Sessitsch, A.
- Venue
- FEMS Microbiology Ecology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2002-01
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 23-32
- ISSN
- 0168-6496 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2169113592
- Cited by
- 298
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 10.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Cultivation-independent population analysis of bacterial endophytes in three potato varieties based on eubacterial and Actinomycetes-specific PCR of 16S rRNA genes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0168-6496(01)00189-1
- The paper
- Sessitsch, A. (2002). Cultivation-independent population analysis of bacterial endophytes in three potato varieties based on eubacterial and Actinomycetes-specific PCR of 16S rRNA genes. FEMS Microbiology Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0168-6496(01)00189-1
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.