Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26293353›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2015

Deciphering common and specific transcriptional immune responses in pea towards the oomycete pathogens Aphanomyces euteiches and Phytophthora pisi.

Sara Hosseini, Malin Elfstrand, Fredrik Heyman, Dan Funck Jensen, Magnus Karlsson

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Characterization of field pea (Frontiers in plant science · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Genomics of Plant Disease Resistance in Legumes.Frontiers in plant science · 2019
    Review
  13. Article
  14. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sara HosseiniDepartment of Forest Mycology and Plant Pathology, Uppsala BioCenter, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Box 7026, SE-75007, Uppsala, Sweden. Sara.Hosseini@slu.se.
Malin ElfstrandDepartment of Forest Mycology and Plant Pathology, Uppsala BioCenter, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Box 7026, SE-75007, Uppsala, Sweden. Malin.Elfstrand@slu.se.
Fredrik HeymanDepartment of Forest Mycology and Plant Pathology, Uppsala BioCenter, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Box 7026, SE-75007, Uppsala, Sweden. Fredrik.Heyman@slu.se.
Dan Funck JensenDepartment of Forest Mycology and Plant Pathology, Uppsala BioCenter, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Box 7026, SE-75007, Uppsala, Sweden. Dan.Jensen@slu.se.
Magnus KarlssonDepartment of Forest Mycology and Plant Pathology, Uppsala BioCenter, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Box 7026, SE-75007, Uppsala, Sweden. Magnus.Karlsson@slu.se.
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRoot rot caused by Aphanomyces euteiches is one of the most destructive pea diseases while a distantly related species P. pisi has been recently described as the agent of pea and faba bean root rot. These two oomycete pathogens with different pathogenicity factor repertories have both evolved specific mechanisms to infect pea. However, little is known about the genes and mechanisms of defence against these pathogens in pea. In the present study, the transcriptomic response of pea to these two pathogens was investigated at two time points during early phase of infection using a Medicago truncatula microarray.

resultsOf the 37,976 genes analysed, 574 and 817 were differentially expressed in response to A. euteiches at 6 hpi and 20 hpi, respectively, while 544 and 611 genes were differentially regulated against P. pisi at 6 hpi and 20 hpi, respectively. Differentially expressed genes associated with plant immunity responses were involved in cell wall reinforcement, hormonal signalling and phenylpropanoid metabolism. Activation of cell wall modification, regulation of jasmonic acid biosynthesis and induction of ethylene signalling pathway were among the common transcriptional responses to both of these oomycetes. However, induction of chalcone synthesis and the auxin pathway were specific transcriptional changes against A. euteiches.

conclusionsOur results demonstrate a global view of differentially expressed pea genes during compatible interactions with P. pisi and A. euteiches at an early phase of infection. The results suggest that distinct signalling pathways are triggered in pea by these two pathogens that lead to common and specific immune mechanisms in response to these two oomycetes. The generated knowledge may eventually be used in breeding pea varieties with resistance against root rot disease.

Indexed as

AphanomycesGene Expression ProfilingGene Expression Regulation, PlantGenes, PlantPhytophthoraPisum sativumSignal Transduction

Identifiers

PMID26293353
PMCPMC4546216
OpenAlexW1941012323

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.