Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 367

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparative transcriptomics of rice reveals an ancient pattern of response to microbial colonization

Open access
Güimil, Sonia, Chang, Hur-Song, Zhu, Tong, Sesma, Ane, Osbourn, Anne, Roux, Christophe, Ioannidis, Vassilios, Oakeley, Edward J., Docquier, Mylène, Descombes, Patrick, Briggs, Steven P., Paszkowski, Uta·2005·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Glomalean fungi induce and colonize symbiotic tissue called arbuscular mycorrhiza on the roots of most land plants. Other fungi also colonize plants but cause disease not symbiosis. Whole-transcriptome analysis using a custom-designed Affymetrix Gene-Chip and confirmation with real-time RT-PCR revealed 224 genes affected during arbuscular mycorrhizal symbiosis. We compared these transcription profiles with those from rice roots that were colonized by pathogens ( Magnaporthe grisea and Fusarium moniliforme ). Over 40% of genes showed differential regulation caused by both the symbiotic and at least one of the pathogenic interactions. A set of genes was similarly expressed in all three associations, revealing a conserved response to fungal colonization. The responses that were shared between pathogen and symbiont infection may play a role in compatibility. Likewise, the responses that are different may cause disease. Some of the genes that respond to mycorrhizal colonization may be involved in the uptake of phosphate. Indeed, phosphate addition mimicked the effect of mycorrhiza on 8% of the tested genes. We found that 34% of the mycorrhiza-associated rice genes were also associated with mycorrhiza in dicots, revealing a conserved pattern of response between the two angiosperm classes.

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 · 10.1073/pnas.0502999102

Cites

2 of 2 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

Cited by

See all 367

Metadata

Authors
Güimil, S., Chang, H.-S., Zhu, T., Sesma, A., Osbourn, A., Roux, C., Ioannidis, V., Oakeley, E. J., Docquier, M., Descombes, P., Briggs, S. P., & Paszkowski, U.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2005-05-19
Volume
102
Issue
22
Pages
8066-8070
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2126312752
Cited by
367
References
2
FWCI
23.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Comparative transcriptomics of rice reveals an ancient pattern of response to microbial colonization. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.0502999102
The paper
Güimil, S., Chang, H.-S., Zhu, T., Sesma, A., Osbourn, A., Roux, C., Ioannidis, V., Oakeley, E. J., Docquier, M., Descombes, P., Briggs, S. P., & Paszkowski, U. (2005). Comparative transcriptomics of rice reveals an ancient pattern of response to microbial colonization. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0502999102

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.