The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Proteomic analysis reveals differences between Vitis vinifera L. cv. Chardonnay and cv. Cabernet Sauvignon and their responses to water deficit and salinity
Open accessAbstract
The impact of water deficit and salt stress on two important wine grape cultivars, Chardonnay and Cabernet Sauvignon, was investigated. Plants were exposed to increasing salinity and water deficit stress over a 16 d time period. Measurements of stem water potentials, and shoot and leaf lengths indicated that Chardonnay was more tolerant to these stresses than Cabernet Sauvignon. Shoot tips were harvested every 8 d for proteomic analysis using a trichloroacetic acid/acetone extraction protocol and two-dimensional gel electrophoresis. Proteins were stained with Coomassie Brilliant Blue, quantified, and then 191 unique proteins were identified using matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization time of flight/time of flight mass spectrometry. Peptide sequences were matched against both the NCBI nr and TIGR Vitis expressed sequence tag (EST) databases that had been implemented with all public Vitis sequences. Approximately 44% of the protein isoforms could be identified. Analysis of variance indicated that varietal difference was the main source of protein expression variation (40%). In stressed plants, reduction of the amount of proteins involved with photosynthesis, protein synthesis, and protein destination was correlated with the inhibition of shoot elongation. Many of the proteins up-regulated in Chardonnay were of unclassified or of unknown function, whereas proteins specifically up-regulated in Cabernet Sauvignon were involved in protein metabolism.
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
Ong, S.-E., Blagoev, B., Kratchmarova, I., Kristensen, D. B., Steen, H., Pandey, A., & Mann, M. (2002) · Molecular & Cellular Proteomics · doi:10.1074/mcp.m200025-mcp200 · Cited by 5,574
Quantitative analysis of complex protein mixtures using isotope-coded affinity tags
Gygi, S. P., Rist, B., Gerber, S. A., Turecek, F., Gelb, M. H., & Aebersold, R. (1999) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/13690 · Cited by 4,683 · cited 2×
“Although powerful mass spectrometry-based techniques have emerged recently, such as isotope-coded affinity tagging (ICAT; Gygi et al., 1999 ), mass-coded abundance tagging strategies (MCAT; Cagney and Emili, 2002), stable isotope labelling by amino acids in cell culture (SILAC; Ong et al., 2002), or isobaric tags for…”
MethodRoss, P. L., Huang, Y. N., Marchese, J. N., Williamson, B., Parker, K., Hattan, S., Khainovski, N., Pillai, S., Dey, S., Daniels, S., et al. (2004) · Molecular & Cellular Proteomics · doi:10.1074/mcp.m400129-mcp200 · Cited by 4,401
Cited by
Photosynthesis under drought and salt stress: regulation mechanisms from whole plant to cell.
Chaves, M. M., Flexas, J., & Pinheiro, C. (2009) · Annals of Botany · doi:10.1093/aob/mcn125 · Cited by 4,181
Impact of Climate Change on Crops Adaptation and Strategies to Tackle Its Outcome: A Review
Raza, A., Razzaq, A., Mehmood, S. S., Zou, X., Zhang, X., Lv, Y., & Xu, J. (2019) · Plants · doi:10.3390/plants8020034 · Cited by 1,762
“Protein production inhibition is the initial metabolic signal against the abiotic factors [84].”
BackgroundEffects of abiotic stress on plants: a systems biology perspective
Cramer, G. R., Urano, K., Delrot, S., Pezzotti, M., & Shinozaki, K. (2011) · BMC Plant Biology · doi:10.1186/1471-2229-11-163 · Cited by 1,375
Self-citationLovisolo, C., Perrone, I., Carra, A., Ferrandino, A., Flexas, J., Medrano, H., & Schubert, A. (2010) · Functional Plant Biology · doi:10.1071/fp09191 · Cited by 417
Mechanisms of Plant Salt Response: Insights from Proteomics
Zhang, H., Han, B., Wang, T., Chen, S., Li, H., Zhang, Y., & Dai, S. (2012) · Journal of Proteome Research · doi:10.1021/pr200861w · Cited by 377
Metadata
- Authors
- Vincent, D., Ergül, A., Bohlman, M. C., Tattersall, E. A. R., Tillett, R. L., Wheatley, M. D., Woolsey, R., Quilici, D. R., Joets, J., Schlauch, K., Schooley, D. A., Cushman, J. C., & Cramer, G. R.
- Venue
- Journal of Experimental Botany
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2007-04-18
- Volume
- 58
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1873-1892
- ISSN
- 0022-0957 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2431
- OpenAlex
- W2137945141
- Cited by
- 207
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 15.40
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Proteomic analysis reveals differences between Vitis vinifera L. cv. Chardonnay and cv. Cabernet Sauvignon and their responses to water deficit and salinity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jxb/erm012
- The paper
- Vincent, D., Ergül, A., Bohlman, M. C., Tattersall, E. A. R., Tillett, R. L., Wheatley, M. D., Woolsey, R., Quilici, D. R., Joets, J., Schlauch, K., Schooley, D. A., Cushman, J. C., & Cramer, G. R. (2007). Proteomic analysis reveals differences between Vitis vinifera L. cv. Chardonnay and cv. Cabernet Sauvignon and their responses to water deficit and salinity. Journal of Experimental Botany. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erm012
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.