Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 264

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Increased Leaf Size: Different Means to an End

Open access
Gonzalez, Nathalie, De Bodt, Stefanie, Sulpice, Ronan, Jikumaru, Yusuke, Chae, Eunyoung, Dhondt, Stijn, Van Daele, Twiggy, De Milde, Liesbeth, Weigel, Detlef, Kamiya, Yuji, Stitt, Mark, Beemster, Gerrit T.S., Inzé, Dirk·2010·Plant Physiology

Abstract

The final size of plant organs, such as leaves, is tightly controlled by environmental and genetic factors that must spatially and temporally coordinate cell expansion and cell cycle activity. However, this regulation of organ growth is still poorly understood. The aim of this study is to gain more insight into the genetic control of leaf size in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) by performing a comparative analysis of transgenic lines that produce enlarged leaves under standardized environmental conditions. To this end, we selected five genes belonging to different functional classes that all positively affect leaf size when overexpressed: AVP1, GRF5, JAW, BRI1, and GA20OX1. We show that the increase in leaf area in these lines depended on leaf position and growth conditions and that all five lines affected leaf size differently; however, in all cases, an increase in cell number was, entirely or predominantly, responsible for the leaf size enlargement. By analyzing hormone levels, transcriptome, and metabolome, we provide deeper insight into the molecular basis of the growth phenotype for the individual lines. A comparative analysis between these data sets indicates that enhanced organ growth is governed by different, seemingly independent pathways. The analysis of transgenic lines simultaneously overexpressing two growth-enhancing genes further supports the concept that multiple pathways independently converge on organ size control 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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1104/pp.110.156018

Cites

3 of 3 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 3 references

Cited by

See all 264

Metadata

Authors
Gonzalez, N., De Bodt, S., Sulpice, R., Jikumaru, Y., Chae, E., Dhondt, S., Van Daele, T., De Milde, L., Weigel, D., Kamiya, Y., Stitt, M., Beemster, G. T. S., & Inzé, D.
Venue
Plant Physiology
Published
2010-05-11
Volume
153
Issue
3
Pages
1261-1279
ISSN
  • 0032-0889 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-2548
OpenAlex
W2039225213
Cited by
264
References
3
FWCI
18.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: Increased Leaf Size: Different Means to an End. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1104/pp.110.156018
The paper
Gonzalez, N., De Bodt, S., Sulpice, R., Jikumaru, Y., Chae, E., Dhondt, S., Van Daele, T., De Milde, L., Weigel, D., Kamiya, Y., Stitt, M., Beemster, G. T. S., & Inzé, D. (2010). Increased Leaf Size: Different Means to an End. Plant Physiology. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.110.156018

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.