Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23355015›Full record

ReviewJournal of chemical ecology2013

Omics methods for probing the mode of action of natural and synthetic phytotoxins.

Stephen O Duke, Joanna Bajsa, Zhiqiang Pan

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of chemical ecology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. 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

3 authors.

Stephen O DukeNPURU, USDA, ARS, P. O. Box 8048, University, MS 38677, USA. stephen.duke@ars.usda.gov
Joanna Bajsa
Zhiqiang Pan

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For a little over a decade, omics methods (transcriptomics, proteomics, metabolomics, and physionomics) have been used to discover and probe the mode of action of both synthetic and natural phytotoxins. For mode of action discovery, the strategy for each of these approaches is to generate an omics profile for phytotoxins with known molecular targets and to compare this library of responses to the responses of compounds with unknown modes of action. Using more than one omics approach enhances the probability of success. Generally, compounds with the same mode of action generate similar responses with a particular omics method. Stress and detoxification responses to phytotoxins can be much clearer than effects directly related to the target site. Clues to new modes of action must be validated with in vitro enzyme effects or genetic approaches. Thus far, the only new phytotoxin target site discovered with omics approaches (metabolomics and physionomics) is that of cinmethylin and structurally related 5-benzyloxymethyl-1,2-isoxazolines. These omics approaches pointed to tyrosine amino-transferase as the target, which was verified by enzyme assays and genetic methods. In addition to being a useful tool of mode of action discovery, omics methods provide detailed information on genetic and biochemical impacts of phytotoxins. Such information can be useful in understanding the full impact of natural phytotoxins in both agricultural and natural ecosystems.

Indexed as

Plant Physiological PhenomenaGene Expression ProfilingHerbicidesMetabolomicsPheromonesProteomicsHerbicidesPheromones

Identifiers

PMID23355015
PMCPMC3589630

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.