ArticlePloS one2019
Reference genes selection for Calotropis procera under different salt stress conditions.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative Transcriptomics Analysis of Roots and Leaves under Cd Stress inInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Salt tolerance ofPhysiology and molecular biology of plants : an international journal of functional plant biology · 2021Article
- Reference genes for quantitative real-time PCR normalization of Cenostigma pyramidale roots under salt stress and mycorrhizal association.Genetics and molecular biology · 2021Article
- Identification of valid reference genes for quantitative RT-PCR inPhysiology and molecular biology of plants : an international journal of functional plant biology · 2020Article
- Nanoparticles Affect the Expression Stability of Housekeeping Genes in Plant Cells.Nanotechnology, science and applications · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Calotropis procera is a perennial Asian shrub with significant adaptation to adverse climate conditions and poor soils. Given its increased salt and drought stress tolerance, C. procera stands out as a powerful candidate to provide alternative genetic resources for biotechnological approaches. The qPCR (real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction), widely recognized among the most accurate methods for quantifying gene expression, demands suitable reference genes (RGs) to avoid over- or underestimations of the relative expression and incorrect interpretation. This study aimed at evaluating the stability of ten RGs for normalization of gene expression of root and leaf of C. procera under different salt stress conditions and different collection times. The selected RGs were used on expression analysis of three target genes. Three independent experiments were carried out in greenhouse with young plants: i) Leaf100 = leaf samples collected 30 min, 2 h, 8 h and 45 days after NaCl-stress (100 mM NaCl); ii) Root50 and iii) Root200 = root samples collected 30 min, 2 h, 8 h and 1day after NaCl-stress (50 and 200 mM NaCl, respectively). Stability rank among the three algorithms used showed high agreement for the four most stable RGs. The four most stable RGs showed high congruence among all combination of collection time, for each software studied, with minor disagreements. CYP23 was the best RG (rank of top four) for all experimental conditions (Leaf100, Root50, and Root200). Using appropriated RGs, we validated the relative expression level of three differentially expressed target genes (NAC78, CNBL4, and ND1) in Leaf100 and Root200 samples. This study provides the first selection of stable reference genes for C. procera under salinity. Our results emphasize the need for caution when evaluating the stability RGs under different amplitude of variable factors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.