Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 317

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 41 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Genomic and proteomic evidence supporting the division of the plant pathogen Ralstonia solanacearum into three species

Open access
Prior, Philippe, Ailloud, Florent, Dalsing, Beth L., Remenant, Benoit, Sanchez, Borja, Allen, Caitilyn·2016·BMC Genomics

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The increased availability of genome sequences has advanced the development of genomic distance methods to describe bacterial diversity. Results of these fast-evolving methods are highly correlated with those of the historically standard DNA-DNA hybridization technique. However, these genomic-based methods can be done more rapidly and less expensively and are less prone to technical and human error. They are thus a technically accessible replacement for species delineation. Here, we use several genomic comparison methods, supported by our own proteomic analyses and metabolic characterization as well as previously published DNA-DNA hybridization analyses, to differentiate members of the Ralstonia solanacearum species complex into three species. This pathogen group consists of diverse and widespread strains that cause bacterial wilt disease on many different plants. RESULTS: We used three different methods to compare the complete genomes of 29 strains from the R. solanacearum species complex. In parallel we profiled the proteomes of 73 strains using Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption/Ionization-Time of Flight Mass Spectrometry (MALDI-TOF-MS). Proteomic profiles together with genomic sequence comparisons consistently and comprehensively described the diversity of the R. solanacearum species complex. In addition, genome-driven functional phenotypic assays excitingly supported an old hypothesis (Hayward et al. (J Appl Bacteriol 69:269-80, 1990)), that closely related members of the R. solanacearum could be identified through a simple assay of anaerobic nitrate metabolism. This assay allowed us to clearly and easily differentiate phylotype II and IV strains from phylotype I and III strains. Further, genomic dissection of the pathway distinguished between proposed subspecies within the current phylotype IV. The assay revealed large scale differences in energy production within the R. solanacearum species complex, indicating coarse evolutionary distance and further supporting a repartitioning of this group into separate species. CONCLUSIONS: Together, the results of these studies support the proposed division of the R. solanacearum species complex into three species, consistent with recent literature, and demonstrate the utility of proteomic and genomic approaches to delineate bacterial species.

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 · 10.1186/s12864-016-2413-z

Cites

41 of 41 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 41 references

Metadata

Authors
Prior, P., Ailloud, F., Dalsing, B. L., Remenant, B., Sanchez, B., & Allen, C.
Venue
BMC Genomics
Published
2016-02-01
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
90-90
ISSN
1471-2164 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2269190855
Cited by
317
References
41
FWCI
28.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: Genomic and proteomic evidence supporting the division of the plant pathogen Ralstonia solanacearum into three species. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/s12864-016-2413-z
The paper
Prior, P., Ailloud, F., Dalsing, B. L., Remenant, B., Sanchez, B., & Allen, C. (2016). Genomic and proteomic evidence supporting the division of the plant pathogen Ralstonia solanacearum into three species. BMC Genomics. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-016-2413-z

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.