Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20034395›Full record

ArticleProteome science2009

Understanding the molecular basis of plant growth promotional effect of Pseudomonas fluorescens on rice through protein profiling.

Saveetha Kandasamy, Karthiba Loganathan, Raveendran Muthuraj, Saravanakumar Duraisamy, Suresh Seetharaman, Raguchander Thiruvengadam, Balasubramanian Ponnusamy, Samiyappan Ramasamy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proteome science, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing 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

36 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Frontiers in plant science · 2022
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

8 authors.

Saveetha KandasamyCentre for Plant Protection Studies, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, India.
Karthiba Loganathan
Raveendran Muthuraj
Saravanakumar Duraisamy
Suresh Seetharaman
Raguchander Thiruvengadam
Balasubramanian Ponnusamy
Samiyappan Ramasamy

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPlant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria (PGPR), Pseudomonas fluorescens strain KH-1 was found to exhibit plant growth promotional activity in rice under both in-vitro and in-vivo conditions. But the mechanism underlying such promotional activity of P. fluorescens is not yet understood clearly. In this study, efforts were made to elucidate the molecular responses of rice plants to P. fluorescens treatment through protein profiling. Two-dimensional polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis strategy was adopted to identify the PGPR responsive proteins and the differentially expressed proteins were analyzed by mass spectrometry.

resultsPriming of P. fluorescens, 23 different proteins found to be differentially expressed in rice leaf sheaths and MS analysis revealed the differential expression of some important proteins namely putative p23 co-chaperone, Thioredoxin h- rice, Ribulose-bisphosphate carboxylase large chain precursor, Nucleotide diPhosphate kinase, Proteosome sub unit protein and putative glutathione S-transferase protein.

conclusionFunctional analyses of the differential proteins were reported to be directly or indirectly involved in growth promotion in plants. Thus, this study confirms the primary role of PGPR strain KH-1 in rice plant growth promotion.

Identifiers

PMID20034395
PMCPMC2805620

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.