Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 788

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Different requirements for EDS1 and NDR1 by disease resistance genes define at least two R gene-mediated signaling pathways in Arabidopsis

Open access
Aarts, Nicole, Metz, Matthew, Holub, Eric, Staskawicz, Brian J., Daniels, Michael J., Parker, Jane E.·1998·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

The Arabidopsis genes EDS1 and NDR1 were shown previously by mutational analysis to encode essential components of race-specific disease resistance. Here, we examined the relative requirements for EDS1 and NDR1 by a broad spectrum of Resistance ( R ) genes present in three Arabidopsis accessions (Columbia, Landsberg- erecta , and Wassilewskija). We show that there is a strong requirement for EDS1 by a subset of R loci ( RPP2 , RPP4 , RPP5 , RPP21 , and RPS4 ), conferring resistance to the biotrophic oomycete Peronospora parasitica , and to Pseudomonas bacteria expressing the avirulence gene avrRps4 . The requirement for NDR1 by these EDS1 -dependent R loci is either weak or not measurable. Conversely, three NDR1 -dependent R loci, RPS2 , RPM1 , and RPS5 , operate independently of EDS1 . Another RPP locus, RPP8 , exhibits no strong exclusive requirement for EDS1 or NDR1 in isolate-specific resistance to P. parasitica , although resistance is compromised weakly by eds1 . Similarly, resistance conditioned by two EDS1 -dependent RPP genes, RPP4 and RPP5 , is impaired partially by ndr1 , implicating a degree of pathway cross-talk. Our results provide compelling evidence for the preferential utilization of either signaling component by particular R genes and thus define at least two disease resistance pathways. The data also suggest that strong dependence on EDS1 or NDR1 is governed by R protein structural type rather than pathogen class.

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.95.17.10306

Cites

24 of 24 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 24 references

Cited by

See all 788

Metadata

Authors
Aarts, N., Metz, M., Holub, E., Staskawicz, B. J., Daniels, M. J., & Parker, J. E.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
1998-08-18
Volume
95
Issue
17
Pages
10306-10311
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2016032876
Cited by
788
References
24
FWCI
35.58
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: Different requirements for EDS1 and NDR1 by disease resistance genes define at least two R gene-mediated signaling pathways in Arabidopsis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.95.17.10306
The paper
Aarts, N., Metz, M., Holub, E., Staskawicz, B. J., Daniels, M. J., & Parker, J. E. (1998). Different requirements for EDS1 and NDR1 by disease resistance genes define at least two R gene-mediated signaling pathways in Arabidopsis. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.95.17.10306

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.