Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30349546›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in plant science2018

Comparative Transcriptomic Analysis of Two Actinorhizal Plants and the Legume

Kai Battenberg, Daniel Potter, Christine A Tabuloc, Joanna C Chiu, Alison M Berry

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in plant science, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Frontiers in plant science · 2019
    Article
  15. 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.

Kai BattenbergDepartment of Plant Sciences, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA, United States.
Daniel PotterDepartment of Plant Sciences, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA, United States.
Christine A TabulocDepartment of Entomology and Nematology, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA, United States.
Joanna C ChiuDepartment of Entomology and Nematology, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA, United States.
Alison M BerryDepartment of Plant Sciences, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Root nodule symbiosis (RNS) is a symbiotic interaction established between angiosperm hosts and nitrogen-fixing soil bacteria in specialized organs called root nodules. The host plants provide photosynthate and the microsymbionts supply fixed nitrogen. The origin of RNS represents a major evolutionary event in the angiosperms, and understanding the genetic underpinnings of this event is of major economic and agricultural importance. Plants that engage in RNS are restricted to a single angiosperm clade known as the nitrogen-fixing clade (NFC), yet occur in multiple lineages scattered within the NFC. It has been postulated that RNS evolved in two steps: a gain-of-predisposition event occurring at the base of the NFC, followed by a gain-of-function event in each host plant lineage. Here, we first explore the premise that RNS has evolved from a single common background, and then we explore whether a two-step process better explains the evolutionary origin of RNS than either a single-step process, or multiple origins. We assembled the transcriptomes of root and nodule of two actinorhizal plants,

Indexed as

actinorhizal plantsevolutionnitrogen fixationnitrogen-fixing cladeorthologyroot nodule symbiosistranscriptomics

Identifiers

PMID30349546
PMCPMC6187967

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.