The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Systemic resistance in Arabidopsis induced by biocontrol bacteria is independent of salicylic acid accumulation and pathogenesis-related gene expression.
Open accessAbstract
Systemic acquired resistance is a pathogen-inducible defense mechanism in plants. The resistant state is dependent on endogenous accumulation of salicylic acid (SA) and is characterized by the activation of genes encoding pathogenesis-related (PR) proteins. Recently, selected nonpathogenic, root-colonizing biocontrol bacteria have been shown to trigger a systemic resistance response as well. To study the molecular basis underlying this type of systemic resistance, we developed an Arabidopsis-based model system using Fusarium oxysporum f sp raphani and Pseudomonas syringae pv tomato as challenging pathogens. Colonization of the rhizosphere by the biological control strain WCS417r of P. fluorescens resulted in a plant-mediated resistance response that significantly reduced symptoms elicited by both challenging pathogens. Moreover, growth of P. syringae in infected leaves was strongly inhibited in P. fluorescens WCS417r-treated plants. Transgenic Arabidopsis NahG plants, unable to accumulate SA, and wild-type plants were equally responsive to P. fluorescens WCS417r-mediated induction of resistance. Furthermore, P. fluorescens WCS417r-mediated systemic resistance did not coincide with the accumulation of PR mRNAs before challenge inoculation. These results indicate that P. fluorescens WCS417r induces a pathway different from the one that controls classic systemic acquired resistance and that this pathway leads to a form of systemic resistance independent of SA accumulation and PR gene expression.
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
Induced systemic resistance by beneficial microbes
Pieterse, C. M. J., Zamioudis, C., Berendsen, R. L., Weller, D. M., Van Wees, S. C. M., & Bakker, P. A. H. M. (2014) · Annual Review of Phytopathology · doi:10.1146/annurev-phyto-082712-102340 · Cited by 3,272
Self-citationDurrant, W. E., & Dong, X. (2004) · Annual Review of Phytopathology · doi:10.1146/annurev.phyto.42.040803.140421 · Cited by 3,184
Compant, S., Duffy, B., Nowak, J., Clément, C., & Barka, E. A. (2005) · Applied and Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1128/aem.71.9.4951-4959.2005 · Cited by 2,640
Microbial interactions and biocontrol in the rhizosphere
Whipps, J. M. (2001) · Journal of Experimental Botany · doi:10.1093/jexbot/52.suppl_1.487 · Cited by 1,934
Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria and root system functioning
Vacheron, J., Desbrosses, G., Bouffaud, M.-L., Touraine, B., Moënne-Loccoz, Y., Muller, D., Legendre, L., Wisniewski-Dyé, F., & Prigent-Combaret, C. (2013) · Frontiers in Plant Science · doi:10.3389/fpls.2013.00356 · Cited by 1,524
Metadata
- Authors
- Pieterse, C. M., van Wees, S. C., Hoffland, E., van Pelt, J. A., & van Loon, L. C.
- Venue
- The Plant Cell
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1996-08
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1225-1237
- ISSN
- 1040-4651 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-298X
- OpenAlex
- W2143382538
- Cited by
- 769
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 36.13
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Systemic resistance in Arabidopsis induced by biocontrol bacteria is independent of salicylic acid accumulation and pathogenesis-related gene expression. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1105/tpc.8.8.1225
- The paper
- Pieterse, C. M., van Wees, S. C., Hoffland, E., van Pelt, J. A., & van Loon, L. C. (1996). Systemic resistance in Arabidopsis induced by biocontrol bacteria is independent of salicylic acid accumulation and pathogenesis-related gene expression. The Plant Cell. https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.8.8.1225
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.