ArticleBMC plant biology2020
Saving time maintaining reliability: a new method for quantification of Tetranychus urticae damage in Arabidopsis whole rosettes.
Article in BMC plant biology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Methyl jasmonate seed priming enhances pest resistance in Arabidopsis and Brassica through species-specific molecular mechanisms.Journal of experimental botany · 2026Article
- Extracellular DNA triggers glucosinolate-dependent defence responses against Frankliniella occidentalis.BMC plant biology · 2026Article
- miR825-5p-regulated TNLs govern Arabidopsis resistance to Tetranychus urticae and Pieris brassicae.The New phytologist · 2025Article
- Spider mite herbivory induces an ABA-driven stomatal defense.Plant physiology · 2024Article
- The RIN4-like/NOI proteins NOI10 and NOI11 modulate the response to biotic stresses mediated by RIN4 in Arabidopsis.Plant cell reports · 2024Article
- Hydroxynitrile lyase defends Arabidopsis against Tetranychus urticae.Plant physiology · 2022Article
- Opposite roles of MAPKKK17 and MAPKKK21 againstFrontiers in plant science · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe model species Tetranychus urticae produces important plant injury and economic losses in the field. The current accepted method for the quantification of the spider mite damage in Arabidopsis whole rosettes is time consuming and entails a bottleneck for large-scale studies such as mutant screening or quantitative genetic analyses. Here, we describe an improved version of the existing method by designing an automatic protocol. The accuracy, precision, reproducibility and concordance of the new enhanced approach are validated in two Arabidopsis accessions with opposite damage phenotypes. Results are compared to the currently available manual method.
resultsImage acquisition experiments revealed that the automatic settings plus 10 values of brightness and the black background are the optimal conditions for a specific recognition of spider mite damage by software programs. Among the different tested methods, the Ilastik-Fiji tandem based on machine learning was the best procedure able to quantify the damage maintaining the differential range of damage between accessions. In addition, the Ilastik-Fiji tandem method showed the lowest variability within a set of conditions and the highest stability under different lighting or background surroundings. Bland-Altman concordance results pointed out a negative value for Ilastik-Fiji, which implies a minor estimation of the damage when compared to the manual standard method.
conclusionsThe novel approach using Ilastik and Fiji programs entails a great improvement for the quantification of the specific spider mite damage in Arabidopsis whole rosettes. The automation of the proposed method based on interactive machine learning eliminates the subjectivity and inter-rater-variability of the previous manual protocol. Besides, this method offers a robust tool for time saving and to avoid the damage overestimation observed with other methods.
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.