The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Complete Genome Sequence of Citrus Huanglongbing Bacterium, ‘Candidatus Liberibacter asiaticus’ Obtained Through Metagenomics
Open accessAbstract
Citrus huanglongbing is the most destructive disease of citrus worldwide. It is spread by citrus psyllids and is associated with a low-titer, phloem-limited infection by any of three uncultured species of α-Proteobacteria, ‘Candidatus Liberibacter asiaticus’, ‘Ca. L. americanus’, and ‘Ca. L. africanus’. A complete circular ‘Ca. L. asiaticus’ genome has been obtained by metagenomics, using the DNA extracted from a single ‘Ca. L. asiaticus’–infected psyllid. The 1.23-Mb genome has an average 36.5% GC content. Annotation revealed a high percentage of genes involved in both cell motility (4.5%) and active transport in general (8.0%), which may contribute to its virulence. ‘Ca. L. asiaticus’ appears to have a limited ability for aerobic respiration and is likely auxotrophic for at least five amino acids. Consistent with its intracellular nature, ‘Ca. L. asiaticus’ lacks type III and type IV secretion systems as well as typical free-living or plant-colonizing extracellular degradative enzymes. ‘Ca. L. asiaticus’ appears to have all type I secretion system genes needed for both multidrug efflux and toxin effector secretion. Multi-protein phylogenetic analysis confirmed ‘Ca. L. asiaticus’ as an early-branching and highly divergent member of the family Rhizobiaceae. This is the first genome sequence of an uncultured α-proteobacteria that is both an intracellular plant pathogen and insect symbiont.
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
Wu, M., Sun, L. V., Vamathevan, J., Riegler, M., Deboy, R., Brownlie, J. C., McGraw, E. A., Martin, W., Esser, C., Ahmadinejad, N., et al. (2004) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0020069 · Cited by 851
Cited by
Accurate and complete genomes from metagenomes
Chen, L.-X., Anantharaman, K., Shaiber, A., Eren, A. M., & Banfield, J. F. (2020) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.258640.119 · Cited by 401
Historical perspective, development and applications of next-generation sequencing in plant virology
Barba, M., Czosnek, H., & Hadidi, A. (2014) · Viruses · doi:10.3390/v6010106 · Cited by 317
Impact of Next-Generation Sequencing Technology in Plant–Microbe Interaction Study
Kumari, A., Sumer, S., Jalan, B., Nongbri, P. L., & Laskar, M. A. (2017) · Microbial Applications Vol.1 · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-52666-9_13 · Cited by 13
Tan, Y., Wang, C., Schneider, T., Li, H., de Souza, R. F., Tang, X., Swisher Grimm, K. D., Hsieh, T.-F., Wang, X., Li, X., et al. (2021) · Microbiology Spectrum · doi:10.1128/spectrum.00509-21 · Cited by 10
Metadata
- Authors
- Duan, Y., Zhou, L., Hall, D. G., Li, W., Doddapaneni, H., Lin, H., Liu, L., Vahling, C. M., Gabriel, D. W., Williams, K. P., Dickerman, A., Sun, Y., & Gottwald, T.
- Venue
- Molecular Plant-Microbe Interactions®
- Publisher
- Scientific Societies
- Published
- 2009-08
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1011-1020
- ISSN
- 0894-0282 (ISSN-L)
- 1943-7706
- OpenAlex
- W2126899791
- Cited by
- 552
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 29.47
- 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
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.
