Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 208

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Nitric oxide evolution and perception

Open access
Neill, S., Bright, J., Desikan, R., Hancock, J., Harrison, J., Wilson, I.·2007·Journal of Experimental Botany

Abstract

Various experimental data indicate signalling roles for nitric oxide (NO) in processes such as xylogenesis, programmed cell death, pathogen defence, flowering, stomatal closure, and gravitropism. However, it still remains unclear how NO is synthesized. Nitric oxide synthase-like activity has been measured in various plant extracts, NO can be generated from nitrite via nitrate reductase and other mechanisms of NO generation are also likely to exist. NO removal mechanisms, for example, by reaction with haemoglobins, have also been identified. NO is a gas emitted by plants, with the rate of evolution increasing under conditions such as pathogen challenge or hypoxia. However, exactly how NO evolution relates to its bioactivity in planta remains to be established. NO has both aqueous and lipid solubility, but is relatively reactive and easily oxidized to other nitrogen oxides. It reacts with superoxide to form peroxynitrite, with other cellular components such as transition metals and haem-containing proteins and with thiol groups to form S-nitrosothiols. Thus, diffusion of NO within the plant may be relatively restricted and there might exist 'NO hot-spots' depending on the sites of NO generation and the local biochemical micro-environment. Alternatively, it is possible that NO is transported as chemical precursors such as nitrite or as nitrosothiols that might function as NO reservoirs. Cellular perception of NO may occur through its reaction with biologically active molecules that could function as 'NO-sensors'. These might include either haem-containing proteins such as guanylyl cyclase which generates the second messenger cGMP or other proteins containing exposed reactive thiol groups. Protein S-nitrosylation alters protein conformation, is reversible and thus, is likely to be of biological significance.

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/jxb/erm218

Cites

5 of 5 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 5 references

Cited by

See all 208

Metadata

Authors
Neill, S., Bright, J., Desikan, R., Hancock, J., Harrison, J., & Wilson, I.
Venue
Journal of Experimental Botany
Published
2007-12-18
Volume
59
Issue
1
Pages
25-35
ISSN
  • 0022-0957 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2431
OpenAlex
W2231877912
Cited by
208
References
5
FWCI
10.88
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: Nitric oxide evolution and perception. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jxb/erm218
The paper
Neill, S., Bright, J., Desikan, R., Hancock, J., Harrison, J., & Wilson, I. (2007). Nitric oxide evolution and perception. Journal of Experimental Botany. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erm218

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.