Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23398910›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2013

Antagonistic, overlapping and distinct responses to biotic stress in rice (Oryza sativa) and interactions with abiotic stress.

Reena Narsai, Chuang Wang, Jie Chen, Jianli Wu, Huixia Shou, James Whelan

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
14.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

52 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 131 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Leaf Blight inPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Reena NarsaiCentre for Computational Systems Biology, Bayliss Building M316 University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley 6009, Western Australia, Australia. reena.narsai@uwa.edu.au
Chuang Wang
Jie Chen
Jianli Wu
Huixia Shou
James Whelan
China National Rice Research Institute · CNZhejiang University · CNARC Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology · AUUniversity of Western Australia · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEvery year, substantial crop loss occurs globally, as a result of bacterial, fungal, parasite and viral infections in rice. Here, we present an in-depth investigation of the transcriptomic response to infection with the destructive bacterial pathogen Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzae(Xoo) in both resistant and susceptible varieties of Oryza sativa. A comparative analysis to fungal, parasite and viral infection in rice is also presented.

resultsWithin 24 h of Xoo inoculation, significant reduction of cell wall components and induction of several signalling components, membrane bound receptor kinases and specific WRKY and NAC transcription factors was prominent, providing a framework for how the presence of this pathogen was signalled and response mounted. Extensive comparative analyses of various other pathogen responses, including in response to infection with another bacterium (Xoc), resistant and susceptible parasite infection, fungal, and viral infections, led to a proposed model for the rice biotic stress response. In this way, a conserved induction of calcium signalling functions, and specific WRKY and NAC transcription factors, was identified in response to all biotic stresses. Comparison of these responses to abiotic stress (cold, drought, salt, heat), enabled the identification of unique genes responsive only to bacterial infection, 240 genes responsive to both abiotic and biotic stress, and 135 genes responsive to biotic, but not abiotic stresses. Functional significance of a number of these genes, using genetic inactivation or over-expression, has revealed significant stress-associated phenotypes. While only a few antagonistic responses were observed between biotic and abiotic stresses, e.g. for a number of endochitinases and kinase encoding genes, some of these may be crucial in explaining greater pathogen infection and damage under abiotic stresses.

conclusionsThe analyses presented here provides a global view of the responses to multiple stresses, further validates known resistance-associated genes, and highlights new potential target genes, some lineage specific to rice, that play important roles in response to stress, providing a roadmap to develop varieties of rice that are more resistant to multiple biotic and abiotic stresses, as encountered in nature.

Indexed as

Stress, PhysiologicalCell WallChitinasesGene Expression Regulation, PlantGenes, PlantOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisOryzaPlant ProteinsRNASignal TransductionTranscription FactorsTranscriptomeXanthomonasChitinasesPlant ProteinsRNATranscription Factors

Identifiers

PMID23398910
PMCPMC3616870
OpenAlexW2020448256

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.