The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Plant and Bacterial Chitinases Differ in Antifungal Activity
Abstract
Chitinases were isolated from the grains of wheat, barley and maize, and compared with those obtained from Serratia marcescens, Streptomyces griseus and Pseudomonas stutzeri for antifungal activity and enzyme specificity. The six enzymes were tested for antifungal activity using an assay based upon inhibition of hyphal extension of the fungi Trichoderma reesei and Phycomyces blakesleeanus. Antifungal activity was observed with as little as 1 μg of each of the grain chitinases, whereas none of the bacterial chitinases had any effect on hyphal extension, even at 50 #x03BC;g chitinase per assay. This difference in antifungal activity correlated with the different mechanisms of action of the two classes of enzymes. In common with other plant chitinases, the grain chitinases functioned as endochitinases and contained lysozyme activity. In contrast, the bacterial enzymes were exochitinases and hydrolysed the chromogenic trisaccharide analogue p-nitrophenyl-β-D-N, N′-diacetylchitobiose, which proved to be an excellent substrate for assaying bacterial chitinases. These experiments strengthen the hypothesis that plant chitinases function to protect the host against fungal infections.
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
Cited by
The Human Chitotriosidase Gene
Boot, R. G., Renkema, G. H., Verhoek, M., Strijland, A., Bliek, J., de Meulemeester, T. M. A. M. O., Mannens, M. M. A. M., & Aerts, J. M. F. G. (1998) · Journal of Biological Chemistry · doi:10.1074/jbc.273.40.25680 · Cited by 416
Activation, Structure, and Organization of Genes Involved in Microbial Defense in Plants
Dixon, R. A., & Harrison, M. J. (1990) · Advances in Genetics · doi:10.1016/s0065-2660(08)60527-1 · Cited by 358
What's new in chitinase research?
Flach, J., Pilet, P. E., & Jollès, P. (1992) · Experientia · doi:10.1007/bf02124285 · Cited by 349
Chernin, L. S., Winson, M. K., Thompson, J. M., Haran, S., Bycroft, B. W., Chet, I., Williams, P., & Stewart, G. S. A. B. (1998) · Journal of Bacteriology · doi:10.1128/jb.180.17.4435-4441.1998 · Cited by 238
Sertraline enhances the activity of antimicrobial agents against pathogens of clinical relevance
Ayaz, M., Subhan, F., Ahmed, J., Khan, A.-U., Ullah, F., Ullah, I., Ali, G., Syed, N.-I.-H., & Hussain, S. (2015) · Journal of Biological Research-Thessaloniki · doi:10.1186/s40709-015-0028-1 · Cited by 147
Metadata
- Authors
- ROBERTS, W. K., & SELITRENNIKOFF, C. P.
- Venue
- Microbiology
- Publisher
- Microbiology Society
- Published
- 1988-01-01
- Volume
- 134
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 169-176
- ISSN
- 1350-0872 (ISSN-L)
- 1465-2080
- OpenAlex
- W2102089668
- Cited by
- 664
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 4.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Plant and Bacterial Chitinases Differ in Antifungal Activity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1099/00221287-134-1-169
- The paper
- ROBERTS, W. K., & SELITRENNIKOFF, C. P. (1988). Plant and Bacterial Chitinases Differ in Antifungal Activity. Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1099/00221287-134-1-169
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.