The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Ethylmethanesulfonate Saturation Mutagenesis in Arabidopsis to Determine Frequency of Herbicide Resistance
Open accessAbstract
Plant resistance to glyphosate has been reported far less frequently than resistance to sulfonylurea and imidazolinone herbicides. However, these studies tend to be anecdotal, without side by side comparisons for a single species or natural isolate. In this study, we tested the frequencies of resistance of three herbicides in a controlled ethylmethanesulfonate (EMS) saturation mutagenesis experiment, allowing a direct comparison of the frequencies at which resistant mutant plants arise. The 100% growth inhibition dose rates of glyphosate, chlorsulfuron (a sulfonylurea herbicide), and imazethapyr (an imidazolinone herbicide) were determined for Arabidopsis. Populations of EMS-mutagenized M(2) seedlings were sprayed with twice the 100% growth inhibition dose of glyphosate, chlorsulfuron, or imazethapyr, and herbicide-resistant mutants were identified. Although there were no glyphosate-resistant mutants among M(2) progeny of 125,000 Columbia and 125,000 Landsberg erecta M(1) lines, chlorsulfuron resistance and imazethapyr resistance each appeared at frequencies of 3.2 x 10(-5). Given the observed frequency of herbicide resistance mutations, we calculate that there are at least 700 mutations in each EMS-mutagenized Arabidopsis line and that fewer than 50,000 M(1) lines are needed to have a 95% chance of finding a mutation in any given G:C base pair in the genome. As part of this study, two previously unreported Arabidopsis mutations conferring resistance to imidazolinone herbicides, csr1-5 (Ala-122-Thr) and csr1-6 (Ala-205-Val), were discovered. Neither of these mutations caused enhanced resistance to chlorsulfuron in Arabidopsis.
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
Protein degradation – an alternative respiratory substrate for stressed plants
Araújo, W. L., Tohge, T., Ishizaki, K., Leaver, C. J., & Fernie, A. R. (2011) · Trends in Plant Science · doi:10.1016/j.tplants.2011.05.008 · Cited by 438
Glyphosate‐resistant crops: history, status and future
Dill, G. M. (2005) · Pest Management Science · doi:10.1002/ps.1008 · Cited by 323
Modrzejewski, D., Hartung, F., Lehnert, H., Sprink, T., Kohl, C., Keilwagen, J., & Wilhelm, R. (2020) · Frontiers in Plant Science · doi:10.3389/fpls.2020.574959 · Cited by 151
Metadata
- Authors
- Jander, G., Baerson, S. R., Hudak, J. A., Gonzalez, K. A., Gruys, K. J., & Last, R. L.
- Venue
- Plant Physiology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2003-01-01
- Volume
- 131
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 139-146
- ISSN
- 0032-0889 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-2548
- OpenAlex
- W2135664442
- Cited by
- 178
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 12.24
- 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: Ethylmethanesulfonate Saturation Mutagenesis in Arabidopsis to Determine Frequency of Herbicide Resistance. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1104/pp.102.010397
- The paper
- Jander, G., Baerson, S. R., Hudak, J. A., Gonzalez, K. A., Gruys, K. J., & Last, R. L. (2003). Ethylmethanesulfonate Saturation Mutagenesis in Arabidopsis to Determine Frequency of Herbicide Resistance. Plant Physiology. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.102.010397
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.