Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22694925›Full record

ArticleBMC plant biology2012

Molecular interactions between the olive and the fruit fly Bactrocera oleae.

Giandomenico Corrado, Fiammetta Alagna, Mariapina Rocco, Giovanni Renzone, Paola Varricchio, Valentina Coppola, Mariangela Coppola, Antonio Garonna, Luciana Baldoni, Andrea Scaloni and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC plant biology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 72 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Proteomic analysis may explain differences inPlant signaling & behavior · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. The Infestation of Olive Fruits byMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Microsatellite Markers in Olives (Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Colonization ofJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Article
  12. The Application ofJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    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

11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Giandomenico CorradoDipartimento di Scienze del Suolo, Pianta, Ambiente e Produzioni Animali, Universita' degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, Via Università 100, Portici, Napoli 80055, Italy.
Fiammetta Alagna
Mariapina Rocco
Giovanni Renzone
Paola Varricchio
Valentina Coppola
Mariangela Coppola
Antonio Garonna
Luciana Baldoni
Andrea Scaloni
Rosa Rao
University of Naples Federico II · ITIstituto di Genetica Molecolare · ITIstituto per il Sistema Produzione Animale in Ambiente Mediterraneo · ITUniversity of Sannio · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe fruit fly Bactrocera oleae is the primary biotic stressor of cultivated olives, causing direct and indirect damages that significantly reduce both the yield and the quality of olive oil. To study the olive-B. oleae interaction, we conducted transcriptomic and proteomic investigations of the molecular response of the drupe. The identifications of genes and proteins involved in the fruit response were performed using a Suppression Subtractive Hybridisation technique and a combined bi-dimensional electrophoresis/nanoLC-ESI-LIT-MS/MS approach, respectively.

resultsWe identified 196 ESTs and 26 protein spots as differentially expressed in olives with larval feeding tunnels. A bioinformatic analysis of the identified non-redundant EST and protein collection indicated that different molecular processes were affected, such as stress response, phytohormone signalling, transcriptional control and primary metabolism, and that a considerable proportion of the ESTs could not be classified. The altered expression of 20 transcripts was also analysed by real-time PCR, and the most striking differences were further confirmed in the fruit of a different olive variety. We also cloned the full-length coding sequences of two genes, Oe-chitinase I and Oe-PR27, and showed that these are wound-inducible genes and activated by B. oleae punctures.

conclusionsThis study represents the first report that reveals the molecular players and signalling pathways involved in the interaction between the olive fruit and its most damaging biotic stressor. Drupe response is complex, involving genes and proteins involved in photosynthesis as well as in the production of ROS, the activation of different stress response pathways and the production of compounds involved in direct defence against phytophagous larvae. Among the latter, trypsin inhibitors should play a major role in drupe resistance reaction.

Indexed as

Signal TransductionStress, PhysiologicalAmino Acid SequenceAnimalsComputational BiologyExpressed Sequence TagsGene Expression Regulation, PlantGenes, PlantHerbivoryMolecular Sequence DataOleaPhotosynthesisProteomeReactive Oxygen SpeciesReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionSequence AlignmentProteomeReactive Oxygen Species

Identifiers

PMID22694925
PMCPMC3733423
OpenAlexW1997614765

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.