Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35780127›Full record

ArticlePlant methods2022

Protocol: rhPCR and SNaPshot assays to distinguish Plasmodiophora brassicae pathotype clusters.

Heather H Tso, Leonardo Galindo-González, Troy Locke, Stephen E Strelkov

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plant methods, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Comprehensive review ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2025
    Review
  4. Review
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

4 authors.

Heather H TsoDepartment of Agricultural, Food and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2P5, Canada.
Leonardo Galindo-GonzálezDepartment of Agricultural, Food and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2P5, Canada.
Troy LockeDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2E9, Canada.
Stephen E StrelkovDepartment of Agricultural, Food and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2P5, Canada. strelkov@ualberta.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7069-9513

Funding

Alberta Canola 126AR19Results Driven Agriculture Research 2019F023R
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClubroot of canola (Brassica napus), caused by the soilborne pathogen Plasmodiophora brassicae, has become a serious threat to canola production in Canada. The deployment of clubroot-resistant (CR) cultivars is the most commonly used management strategy; however, the widespread cultivation of CR canola has resulted in the emergence of new pathotypes of P. brassicae capable of overcoming resistance. Several host differential sets have been reported for pathotype identification, but such testing is time-consuming, labor-intensive, and based on phenotypic classifications. The development of rapid and objective methods that allow for efficient, cost-effective and convenient pathotyping would enable testing of a much larger number of samples in shorter times. The aim of this study was to develop two pathotyping assays, an RNase H2-dependent PCR (rhPCR) assay and a SNaPshot assay, which could quickly differentiate P. brassicae pathotypes.

resultsBoth assays clearly distinguished between pathotype clusters in a collection of 38 single-spore isolates of P. brassicae. Additional isolates pathotyped from clubbed roots and samples from blind testing also were correctly clustered. The rhPCR assay generated clearly differentiating electrophoretic bands without non-specific amplification. The SNaPshot assay was able to detect down to a 10% relative allelic proportion in a 10:90 template mixture with both single-spore isolates and field isolates when evaluated in a relative abundance test.

conclusionsThis study describes the development of two rapid and sensitive technologies for P. brassicae pathotyping. The high-throughput potential and accuracy of both assays makes them promising as SNP-based pathotype identification tools for clubroot diagnostics. rhPCR is a highly sensitive approach that can be optimized into a quantitative assay, while the main advantages of SNaPshot are its ability to multiplex samples and alleles in a single reaction and the detection of up to four allelic variants per target site.

Indexed as

Brassica napusClubrootDetectionDiagnosticsPathotypingPCRPlasmodiophora brassicaerhPCR, SNaPshot, Sequencing

Identifiers

PMID35780127
PMCPMC9250251

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.