ArticlePlant cell reports2023
Evolution of antimicrobial cysteine-rich peptides in plants.
Article in Plant cell reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cysteine-Rich Peptides in Food Systems: Structure, Sources, Functional Properties, Potential Applications, and Future Perspectives.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2026Review
- Peptide hormones in shaping root system architecture and environmental adaptation: Current advances and translational perspectives.Plant communications · 2026Review
- Evolutionary shifts in plant adaptation mediated by phytohormones.Plant communications · 2026Review
- Under heavy metal stress: genomic characterization and expression profiles of miRNA families in Phaseolus vulgaris.BMC plant biology · 2026Article
- Recombinant Expression and Antimicrobial Mechanism of Cysteine-Rich Antimicrobial Peptides fromMarine drugs · 2026Article
- Global change-driven plant adaptive strategies and interspecific interaction networks: from molecular regulation to ecological management.Frontiers in plant science · 2026Review
- Heterologous Expression and Antimicrobial Targets of a Novel Glycine-Rich Antimicrobial Peptide fromMarine drugs · 2025Article
- Heterologous Expression and Antimicrobial Mechanism of a Cysteine-Rich Peptide from BarnacleMicroorganisms · 2025Article
- Antioxidant activities of Saudi honey samples related to their content of short peptides.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Applications of tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS) in antimicrobial peptides field: Current state and new applications.Heliyon · 2024Review
- Carboxypeptidase inhibitors fromFrontiers in molecular biosciences · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
key messageWe analyzed the evolutionary pattern of cysteine-rich peptides (CRPs) to infer the relationship between CRP copy number and plant ecotype, and the origin of bi-domains CRPs. Plants produce cysteine-rich peptides (CRPs) that have long-lasting broad-spectrum antimicrobial activity to protect themselves from various groups of pathogens. We analyzed 240 plant genomes, ranging from algae to eudicots, and discovered that CRPs are widely distributed in plants. Our comparative genomics results revealed that CRP genes have been amplified through both whole genome and local tandem duplication. The copy number of these genes varied significantly across lineages and was associated with the plant ecotype. This may be due to their resistance to changing pathogenic environments. The conserved and lineage-specific CRP families contribute to diverse antimicrobial activities. Furthermore, we investigated the unique bi-domain CRPs that result from unequal crossover events. Our findings provide a unique evolutionary perspective on CRPs and insights into their antimicrobial and symbiosis characteristics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37378705What 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.