ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2022
Application of the NanoString nCounter System as an Alternative Method to Investigate Molecular Mechanisms Involved in Host Plant Responses to
Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative transcriptome analysis reveals molecular mechanisms of resistance in Chinese cabbage toFrontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Clubroot, caused by the soilborne pathogen Plasmodiophora brassicae, is an important disease of canola (Brassica napus) and other crucifers. The recent application of RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) technologies to study P. brassicae−host interactions has generated large amounts of gene expression data, improving knowledge of the molecular mechanisms of pathogenesis and host resistance. Quantitative PCR (qPCR) analysis has been widely applied to examine the expression of a limited number of genes and to validate the results of RNA-seq studies, but may not be ideal for analyzing larger suites of target genes or increased sample numbers. Moreover, the need for intermediate steps such as cDNA synthesis may introduce variability that could affect the accuracy of the data generated by qPCR. Here, we report the validation of gene expression data from a previous RNA-seq study of clubroot using the NanoString nCounter System, which achieves efficient gene expression quantification in a fast and simple manner. We first confirm the robustness of the NanoString system by comparing the results with those generated by qPCR and RNA-seq and then discuss the importance of some candidate genes for resistance or susceptibility to P. brassicae in the host. The results show that the expression of genes measured using NanoString have a high correlation with the values obtained using the other two technologies, with R > 0.90 and p < 0.01, and the same expression patterns for most genes. The three methods (qPCR, RNA-seq, and NanoString) were also compared in terms of laboratory procedures, time, and cost. We propose that the NanoString nCounter System is a robust, sensitive, highly reproducible, and simple technology for gene expression analysis. NanoString could become a common alternative to qPCR to validate RNA-seq data or to create panels of genes for use as markers of resistance/susceptibility when plants are challenged with different P. brassicae pathotypes.
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.