Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33494722›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2021

Global transcriptome changes of elongating internode of sugarcane in response to mepiquat chloride.

Rongfa Chen, Yegeng Fan, Huiwen Zhou, Shanping Mo, Zhongfeng Zhou, Haifeng Yan, Ting Luo, Xing Huang, Mengling Weng, Prakash Lakshmanan and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

13 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Rongfa ChenSugarcane Research Institute, Guangxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences/Sugarcane Research Center, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, No. 172, East Daxue Road, Nanning, 530007, Guangxi, China.
Yegeng FanSugarcane Research Institute, Guangxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences/Sugarcane Research Center, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, No. 172, East Daxue Road, Nanning, 530007, Guangxi, China.
Huiwen ZhouSugarcane Research Institute, Guangxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences/Sugarcane Research Center, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, No. 172, East Daxue Road, Nanning, 530007, Guangxi, China.
Shanping MoSugarcane Research Institute, Guangxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences/Sugarcane Research Center, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, No. 172, East Daxue Road, Nanning, 530007, Guangxi, China.
Zhongfeng ZhouSugarcane Research Institute, Guangxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences/Sugarcane Research Center, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, No. 172, East Daxue Road, Nanning, 530007, Guangxi, China.
Haifeng YanSugarcane Research Institute, Guangxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences/Sugarcane Research Center, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, No. 172, East Daxue Road, Nanning, 530007, Guangxi, China.
Ting LuoSugarcane Research Institute, Guangxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences/Sugarcane Research Center, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, No. 172, East Daxue Road, Nanning, 530007, Guangxi, China.
Xing HuangSugarcane Research Institute, Guangxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences/Sugarcane Research Center, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, No. 172, East Daxue Road, Nanning, 530007, Guangxi, China.
Mengling WengSugarcane Research Institute, Guangxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences/Sugarcane Research Center, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, No. 172, East Daxue Road, Nanning, 530007, Guangxi, China.
Prakash LakshmananSugarcane Research Institute, Guangxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences/Sugarcane Research Center, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, No. 172, East Daxue Road, Nanning, 530007, Guangxi, China.
Yangrui LiSugarcane Research Institute, Guangxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences/Sugarcane Research Center, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, No. 172, East Daxue Road, Nanning, 530007, Guangxi, China.
Lihang QiuSugarcane Research Institute, Guangxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences/Sugarcane Research Center, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, No. 172, East Daxue Road, Nanning, 530007, Guangxi, China. qiulihang2017@126.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3369-0725
Jianming WuSugarcane Research Institute, Guangxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences/Sugarcane Research Center, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, No. 172, East Daxue Road, Nanning, 530007, Guangxi, China. wujianming2004@126.com.
Sugarcane Research Center (Brazil) · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMepiquat chloride (DPC) is a chemical that is extensively used to control internode growth and create compact canopies in cultured plants. Previous studies have suggested that DPC could also inhibit gibberellin biosynthesis in sugarcane. Unfortunately, the molecular mechanism underlying the suppressive effects of DPC on plant growth is still largely unknown.

resultsIn the present study, we first obtained high-quality long transcripts from the internodes of sugarcane using the PacBio Sequel System. A total of 72,671 isoforms, with N50 at 3073, were generated. These long isoforms were used as a reference for the subsequent RNA-seq. Afterwards, short reads generated from the Illumina HiSeq 4000 platform were used to compare the differentially expressed genes in both the DPC and the control groups. Transcriptome profiling showed that most significant gene changes occurred after six days post DPC treatment. These genes were related to plant hormone signal transduction and biosynthesis of several metabolites, indicating that DPC affected multiple pathways, in addition to suppressing gibberellin biosynthesis. The network of DPC on the key stage was illustrated by weighted gene co-expression network analysis (WGCNA). Among the 36 constructed modules, the top positive correlated module, at the stage of six days post spraying DPC, was sienna3. Notably, Stf0 sulfotransferase, cyclin-like F-box, and HOX12 were the hub genes in sienna3 that had high correlation with other genes in this module. Furthermore, the qPCR validated the high accuracy of the RNA-seq results.

conclusionTaken together, we have demonstrated the key role of these genes in DPC-induced growth inhibition in sugarcane.

Indexed as

SaccharumTranscriptomeGene Expression ProfilingGene Expression Regulation, PlantPiperidinesmepiquatPiperidinesFull-length transcriptomeGrowthInternodeMepiquat chlorideRNA-seqSugarcane

Identifiers

PMID33494722
PMCPMC7831198
OpenAlexW3116802856

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.