ArticleCurrent genetics2006
RNA editing site recognition in heterologous plant mitochondria.
Article in Current genetics, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- OsPPR939, a nad5 splicing factor, is essential for plant growth and pollen development in rice.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2021Article
- CRP1 Protein: (dis)similarities betweenFrontiers in plant science · 2017Article
- The RNA editing pattern of cox2 mRNA is affected by point mutations in plant mitochondria.PloS one · 2011Article
- Intron RNA editing is essential for splicing in plant mitochondria.Nucleic acids research · 2010Article
- Multiple specificity recognition motifs enhance plant mitochondrial RNA editing in vitro.The Journal of biological chemistry · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
RNA editing is a process that modifies the information content of mitochondrial messenger RNAs in flowering plants changing specific cytosine residues into uridine. To gain insight into editing site recognition, we used electroporation to introduce engineered wheat (Triticum aestivum) or potato (Solanum tuberosum) mitochondrial cox2 genes, and an atp9-containing chimeric gene, into non-cognate mitochondria, and observed the efficiency of editing in these contexts. Both wheat and potato mitochondria were able to express "foreign" constructs, and their products were properly spliced. Seventeen and twelve editing sites are present in the coding regions of wheat and potato cox2 transcripts, respectively. Eight are common to both plants, whereas nine are specific to wheat, and four to potato. An analogous situation is found for the atp9 mRNA coding regions from these species. We found that both mitochondria were able to recognize sites that are already present as T at the genomic level, making RNA editing unnecessary for that specific residue in the cognate organelle. Our results demonstrate that non-cognate mitochondria are able to edit residues that are not edited in their own transcripts, and support the hypothesis that the same trans-acting factor may recognize several editing sites.
Indexed as
Identifiers
17033819What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.