Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17211582›Full record

ArticlePhotosynthesis research2006

Case study of combinatorial imaging: what protocol and what chlorophyll fluorescence image to use when visualizing infection of Arabidopsis thaliana by Pseudomonas syringae?

Karel Matous, Zuzana Benediktyová, Susanne Berger, Thomas Roitsch, Ladislav Nedbal

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Photosynthesis research, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. ChlorophyllPlant methods · 2016
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Image-based phenotyping of plant disease symptoms.Frontiers in plant science · 2014
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Karel MatousInstitute of Systems Biology and Ecology, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Zámek 136, Nové Hrady, 37333, Czech Republic.
Zuzana Benediktyová
Susanne Berger
Thomas Roitsch
Ladislav Nedbal

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Localized infection of a plant can be mapped by a sequence of images capturing chlorophyll fluorescence transients in actinic light. Choice of the actinic light protocol co-determines fluorescence contrast between infected leaf segment and surrounding healthy tissue. Frequently, biology cannot predict with which irradiance protocol, in which fluorescence image of the sequence, and in which segment of the image there will be the highest contrast between the healthy and infected tissue. Here, we introduce a new technique that can be applied to identify the combination of chlorophyll fluorescence images yielding the highest contrast. The sets of the most contrasting images vary throughout the progress of the infection. Such specific image sets, stress-revealing fluorescence signatures, can be found for the initial and late phases of the infection. Using these signatures, images can be divided into segments that show tissue in different infection phases. We demonstrate the capacity of the algorithm in an investigation of infection of the model plant Arabidopsis thaliana by the bacterium Pseudomonas syringae. We show that the highest contrast is found with transients elicited by fluctuating, harmonically modulated irradiance with long periods.

Indexed as

FluorescenceArabidopsisChlorophyllImage Processing, Computer-AssistedPlant DiseasesPseudomonas syringaeChlorophyll

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.