The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Quantitative Nature of Arabidopsis Responses during Compatible and Incompatible Interactions with the Bacterial Pathogen Pseudomonas syringae [W]
Open accessAbstract
We performed large-scale mRNA expression profiling using an Affymetrix GeneChip to study Arabidopsis responses to the bacterial pathogen Pseudomonas syringae. The interactions were compatible (virulent bacteria) or incompatible (avirulent bacteria), including a nonhost interaction and interactions mediated by two different avirulence gene–resistance (R) gene combinations. Approximately 2000 of the ∼8000 genes monitored showed reproducible significant expression level changes in at least one of the interactions. Analysis of biological variation suggested that the system behavior of the plant response in an incompatible interaction was robust but that of a compatible interaction was not. A large part of the difference between incompatible and compatible interactions can be explained quantitatively. Despite high similarity between responses mediated by the R genes RPS2 and RPM1 in wild-type plants, RPS2-mediated responses were strongly suppressed by the ndr1 mutation and the NahG transgene, whereas RPM1-mediated responses were not. This finding is consistent with the resistance phenotypes of these plants. We propose a simple quantitative model with a saturating response curve that approximates the overall behavior of this plant-pathogen system.
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
Cluster analysis and display of genome-wide expression patterns
Eisen, M. B., Spellman, P. T., Brown, P. O., & Botstein, D. (1998) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.95.25.14863 · Cited by 16,184
Cited by
Jones, J. D. G., & Dangl, J. L. (2006) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature05286 · Cited by 13,177
Contrasting Mechanisms of Defense Against Biotrophic and Necrotrophic Pathogens
Glazebrook, J. (2005) · Annual Review of Phytopathology · doi:10.1146/annurev.phyto.43.040204.135923 · Cited by 4,367
Self-citationPlant immunity: towards an integrated view of plant–pathogen interactions
Dodds, P. N., & Rathjen, J. P. (2010) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg2812 · Cited by 3,424
Significance of Inducible Defense-related Proteins in Infected Plants
van Loon, L. C., Rep, M., & Pieterse, C. M. J. (2006) · Annual Review of Phytopathology · doi:10.1146/annurev.phyto.44.070505.143425 · Cited by 3,410
Boller, T., & Felix, G. (2009) · Annual Review of Plant Biology · doi:10.1146/annurev.arplant.57.032905.105346 · Cited by 3,387
Metadata
- Authors
- Tao, Y., Xie, Z., Chen, W., Glazebrook, J., Chang, H.-S., Han, B., Zhu, T., Zou, G., & Katagiri, F.
- Venue
- The Plant Cell
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2003-02-01
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 317-330
- ISSN
- 1040-4651 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-298X
- OpenAlex
- W2123208777
- Cited by
- 702
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 57.36
- 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.