The DOI matches its Crossref record; 51 of the 51 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Effects of plant genotype and growth stage on the structure of bacterial communities associated with potato (Solanum tuberosum L.): Effects on bacterial communities associated with potato
Open accessAbstract
The effects of genotype, plant growth and experimental factors (soil and year) on potato-associated bacterial communities were studied. Cultivars Achirana Inta, Désirée, Merkur and transgenic Désirée line DL12 (containing T4 lysozyme gene) were assessed in two field experiments. Cross-comparisons between both experiments were made using Désirée plants. Culture-dependent and -independent approaches were used to demonstrate effects on total bacterial, actinobacterial and Pseudomonas communities in bulk and rhizosphere soils and endospheres. PCR-denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis fingerprints prepared with group-specific primers were analyzed using multivariate analyses and revealed that bacterial communities in Achirana Inta plants differed most from those of Désirée and Merkur. No significant effects were found between Désirée and DL12 lines. Plant growth stage strongly affected different plant-associated communities in both experiments. To investigate the effect of plant-associated communities on plant health, 800 isolates from rhizospheres and endospheres at the flowering stage were tested for suppression of Ralstonia solanacearum biovar 2 and/or Rhizoctonia solani AG3. A group of isolates closely resembling Lysobacter sp. dominated in young plants. Its prevalence was affected by plant growth stage and experiment rather than by plant genotype. It was concluded that plant growth stage overwhelmed any effect of plant genotype on the bacterial communities associated with potato.
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
Muyzer, G., de Waal, E. C., & Uitterlinden, A. G. (1993) · Applied and Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1128/aem.59.3.695-700.1993 · Cited by 11,429
Current protocols in molecular biology
Sargent, T. (1988) · Analytical Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/0003-2697(88)90147-9 · Cited by 7,205
SYSTEMIC RESISTANCE INDUCED BY RHIZOSPHERE BACTERIA
van Loon, L. C., Bakker, P. A. H. M., & Pieterse, C. M. J. (1998) · Annual Review of Phytopathology · doi:10.1146/annurev.phyto.36.1.453 · Cited by 2,361
Molecular Microbial Ecology Manual
(1996) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-94-009-0215-2 · Cited by 1,687
Heuer, H., Krsek, M., Baker, P., Smalla, K., & Wellington, E. M. (1997) · Applied and Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1128/aem.63.8.3233-3241.1997 · Cited by 1,656
Smalla, K., Wieland, G., Buchner, A., Zock, A., Parzy, J., Kaiser, S., Roskot, N., Heuer, H., & Berg, G. (2001) · Applied and Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1128/aem.67.10.4742-4751.2001 · Cited by 1,185
The analysis of vegetation-environment relationships by canonical correspondence analysis
ter Braak, C. J. F. (1987) · Plant Ecology · doi:10.1007/bf00038688 · Cited by 1,091
Molecular Microbial Ecology Manual
(1995) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-94-011-0351-0 · Cited by 1,042
Thomashow, L. S., & Weller, D. M. (1988) · Journal of Bacteriology · doi:10.1128/jb.170.8.3499-3508.1988 · Cited by 727
Zinniel, D. K., Lambrecht, P., Harris, N. B., Feng, Z., Kuczmarski, D., Higley, P., Ishimaru, C. A., Arunakumari, A., Barletta, R. G., & Vidaver, A. K. (2002) · Applied and Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1128/aem.68.5.2198-2208.2002 · Cited by 617
Cited by
Hardoim, P. R., van Overbeek, L. S., Berg, G., Pirttilä, A. M., Compant, S., Campisano, A., Döring, M., & Sessitsch, A. (2015) · Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews · doi:10.1128/mmbr.00050-14 · Cited by 2,708
Self-citationPlant 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
Ma, Y., Prasad, M. N. V., Rajkumar, M., & Freitas, H. (2011) · Biotechnology Advances · doi:10.1016/j.biotechadv.2010.12.001 · Cited by 1,152
Manipulating the soil microbiome to increase soil health and plant fertility
Chaparro, J. M., Sheflin, A. M., Manter, D. K., & Vivanco, J. M. (2012) · Biology and Fertility of Soils · doi:10.1007/s00374-012-0691-4 · Cited by 1,099
The Soil Microbiome Influences Grapevine-Associated Microbiota
Zarraonaindia, I., Owens, S. M., Weisenhorn, P., West, K., Hampton-Marcell, J., Lax, S., Bokulich, N. A., Mills, D. A., Martin, G., Taghavi, S., et al. (2015) · mBio · doi:10.1128/mbio.02527-14 · Cited by 990
Metadata
- Authors
- Van Overbeek, L., & Van Elsas, J. D.
- Venue
- FEMS Microbiology Ecology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2008-05
- Volume
- 64
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 283-296
- ISSN
- 0168-6496 (ISSN-L)
- 1574-6941
- OpenAlex
- W1871891164
- Cited by
- 293
- References
- 51
- FWCI
- 17.35
- 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: Effects of plant genotype and growth stage on the structure of bacterial communities associated with potato (Solanum tuberosum L.): Effects on bacterial communities associated with potato. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1574-6941.2008.00469.x
- The paper
- Van Overbeek, L., & Van Elsas, J. D. (2008). Effects of plant genotype and growth stage on the structure of bacterial communities associated with potato (Solanum tuberosum L.): Effects on bacterial communities associated with potato. FEMS Microbiology Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6941.2008.00469.x
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.
