Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26981426›Full record

ArticleGenomics data2016

Microarray analysis of kiwifruit (Actinidia chinensis) bark following challenge by the sucking insect Hemiberlesia lataniae (Hemiptera: Diaspididae).

M Garry Hill, Kirstin V Wurms, Marcus W Davy, Elaine Gould, Andrew Allan, Nicola A Mauchline, Zhiwei Luo, Annette Ah Chee, Kate Stannard, Roy D Storey and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genomics data, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 100% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

M Garry HillNew Zealand Institute for Plant & Food Research Limited (PFR), Canterbury Agriculture & Science Centre, Gerald St, Lincoln 7608, New Zealand.
Kirstin V WurmsPFR, Private Bag 3230, Waikato Mail Centre, Hamilton 3240, New Zealand.
Marcus W DavyPFR, 412 No1 Rd RD2, Te Puke, New Zealand.
Elaine GouldZespri International Limited, 400 Maunganui Road, Mount Maunganui 3116, New Zealand.
Andrew AllanPFR, Private Bag 92169, Auckland, New Zealand.
Nicola A MauchlinePFR, 412 No1 Rd RD2, Te Puke, New Zealand.
Zhiwei LuoPFR, Private Bag 92169, Auckland, New Zealand.
Annette Ah CheePFR, Private Bag 3230, Waikato Mail Centre, Hamilton 3240, New Zealand.
Kate StannardPFR, 412 No1 Rd RD2, Te Puke, New Zealand.
Roy D StoreyPFR, 412 No1 Rd RD2, Te Puke, New Zealand.
Erik H RikkerinkPFR, Private Bag 92169, Auckland, New Zealand.
Plant & Food Research · NZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Both commercial and experimental genotypes of kiwifruit (Actinidia spp.) exhibit large differences in response to insect pests. An understanding of the vine's physiological response to insect feeding and its genetic basis will be important in assisting the development of varieties with acceptable levels of pest resistance. This experiment describes transcriptome changes observed in the bark of kiwifruit 2 and 7 days after the commencement of feeding by the armored scale insect pest, Hemiberlesia lataniae. Using a cDNA microarray consisting of 17,512 unigenes, we measured transcriptome changes and analyzed these into functional ontology categories using MapMan. Results are available in the GEO database GSE73922 and are described fully in Ref. Hill et al. (2015) [1]. After 7 days, transcripts associated with photosynthesis were down-regulated and secondary metabolism was up-regulated. Differential expression of transcripts associated with stress response was consistent with a defense response involving both effector and herbivore-triggered immunities, with predominant involvement of the salicylic acid phytohormonal pathway. This hypothesis was supported by the results of two laboratory experiments. The methods described here could be further adapted and applied to the study of plant responses to a wide range of sessile sucking pests.

Identifiers

PMID26981426
PMCPMC4778680
OpenAlexW2252875920

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.