The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Sequence and RFLP analysis of the elongation factor Tu gene used in differentiation and classification of phytoplasmas
Abstract
Primers designed from sequences of the gene encoding the elongation factor Tu (tuf gene) of several culturabie mollicutes amplified most of the tuf gene from phytoplasmas of the aster yellows, stolbur and X-disease groups. About 85% of the tuf gene from two aster yellows strains and a tomato stolbur phytoplasma was sequenced. The nucleotide sequence similarity between these related phytoplasmas was between 87·8 and 97·0%, whereas the homology with other mollicutes was 66·3-72·7%. The similarity of the deduced amino acid sequence was significantly higher, ranging from 96·0 to 99·4% among the phytoplasmas and 78·5% to 83·3% between phytoplasmas and the culturabie mollicutes examined. From the nucleotide sequences of the phytoplasma strains, two pairs of primers were designed; one amplified the phytoplasmas of most phylogenetic groups that were established, the other was specific for the aster yellows and stolbur groups. The phytoplasmas of the various groups that were amplified could be distinguished by RFLP analysis using Sau 3AI, Alu I and Hpa ll. The aster yellows group could be divided into five Sau 3AI RFLP groups. These results showed that the tuf gene has the potential to be used to differentiate and classify phytoplasmas. Southern blot analysis revealed that the tuf gene is present as a single copy.
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
Needleman, S. B., & Wunsch, C. D. (1970) · Journal of Molecular Biology · doi:10.1016/0022-2836(70)90057-4 · Cited by 11,288
Cited by
Molecular Biology and Pathogenicity of Mycoplasmas
Razin, S., Yogev, D., & Naot, Y. (1998) · Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews · doi:10.1128/mmbr.62.4.1094-1156.1998 · Cited by 1,930
Phytoplasma: Phytopathogenic Mollicutes
Lee, I.-M., Davis, R. E., & Gundersen-Rindal, D. E. (2000) · Annual Review of Microbiology · doi:10.1146/annurev.micro.54.1.221 · Cited by 965
Cherkaoui, A., Hibbs, J., Emonet, S., Tangomo, M., Girard, M., Francois, P., & Schrenzel, J. (2010) · Journal of Clinical Microbiology · doi:10.1128/jcm.01881-09 · Cited by 527
Phytoplasma and phytoplasma diseases: a review of recent research
Bertaccini, A., & Duduk, B. (2009) · Archivio istituzionale della ricerca (Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna) · doi:10.14601/phytopathol_mediterr-3300 · Cited by 253
Metadata
- Authors
- Schneider, B., & Gibb, K. S.
- Venue
- Microbiology
- Publisher
- Microbiology Society
- Published
- 1997-10-01
- Volume
- 143
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 3381-3389
- ISSN
- 1350-0872 (ISSN-L)
- 1465-2080
- OpenAlex
- W2120470570
- Cited by
- 265
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 6.60
- 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: Sequence and RFLP analysis of the elongation factor Tu gene used in differentiation and classification of phytoplasmas. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1099/00221287-143-10-3381
- The paper
- Schneider, B., & Gibb, K. S. (1997). Sequence and RFLP analysis of the elongation factor Tu gene used in differentiation and classification of phytoplasmas. Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1099/00221287-143-10-3381
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.