Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 481

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 147 of the 147 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Nitric oxide in plants: an assessment of the current state of knowledge

Open access
Mur, L. A. J., Mandon, J., Persijn, S., Cristescu, S. M., Moshkov, I. E., Novikova, G. V., Hall, M. A., Harren, F. J. M., Hebelstrup, K. H., Gupta, K. J.·2013·AoB Plants

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: After a series of seminal works during the last decade of the 20th century, nitric oxide (NO) is now firmly placed in the pantheon of plant signals. Nitric oxide acts in plant-microbe interactions, responses to abiotic stress, stomatal regulation and a range of developmental processes. By considering the recent advances in plant NO biology, this review will highlight certain key aspects that require further attention. SCOPE AND CONCLUSIONS: The following questions will be considered. While cytosolic nitrate reductase is an important source of NO, the contributions of other mechanisms, including a poorly defined arginine oxidizing activity, need to be characterized at the molecular level. Other oxidative pathways utilizing polyamine and hydroxylamine also need further attention. Nitric oxide action is dependent on its concentration and spatial generation patterns. However, no single technology currently available is able to provide accurate in planta measurements of spatio-temporal patterns of NO production. It is also the case that pharmaceutical NO donors are used in studies, sometimes with little consideration of the kinetics of NO production. We here include in planta assessments of NO production from diethylamine nitric oxide, S-nitrosoglutathione and sodium nitroprusside following infiltration of tobacco leaves, which could aid workers in their experiments. Further, based on current data it is difficult to define a bespoke plant NO signalling pathway, but rather NO appears to act as a modifier of other signalling pathways. Thus, early reports that NO signalling involves cGMP-as in animal systems-require revisiting. Finally, as plants are exposed to NO from a number of external sources, investigations into the control of NO scavenging by such as non-symbiotic haemoglobins and other sinks for NO should feature more highly. By crystallizing these questions the authors encourage their resolution through the concerted efforts of the plant NO community.

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/aobpla/pls052

Cites

147 of 147 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

1 retracted

Show all 147 references

Cited by

See all 481

Metadata

Authors
Mur, L. A. J., Mandon, J., Persijn, S., Cristescu, S. M., Moshkov, I. E., Novikova, G. V., Hall, M. A., Harren, F. J. M., Hebelstrup, K. H., & Gupta, K. J.
Venue
AoB Plants
Published
2012-12-20
Volume
5
Issue
0
Pages
pls052-pls052
ISSN
2041-2851 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2000516639
Cited by
481
References
147
FWCI
18.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: Nitric oxide in plants: an assessment of the current state of knowledge. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/aobpla/pls052
The paper
Mur, L. A. J., Mandon, J., Persijn, S., Cristescu, S. M., Moshkov, I. E., Novikova, G. V., Hall, M. A., Harren, F. J. M., Hebelstrup, K. H., & Gupta, K. J. (2013). Nitric oxide in plants: an assessment of the current state of knowledge. AoB Plants. https://doi.org/10.1093/aobpla/pls052

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.