ArticlePloS one2024
Global changes in gene expression during compatible and incompatible interactions of faba bean (Vicia faba L.) during Orobanche foetida parasitism.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Combining two high-density QTL maps with a reference genome to identify candidate genes for morphology, yield, and biotic resistance in faba bean (Frontiers in plant science · 2026Article
- Broomrapes in Major Mediterranean Crops: From Management Strategies to Novel Approaches for Next-Generation Control.Biotech (Basel (Switzerland)) · 2025Review
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 at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Orobanche foetida Poiret is the main constraint facing faba bean crop in Tunisia. Indeed, in heavily infested fields with this parasitic plant, yield losses may reach 90%, and the recent estimation of the infested area is around 80,000 ha. Identifying genes involved in the Vicia faba/O. foetida interaction is crucial for the development of effective faba bean breeding programs. However, there is currently no available information on the transcriptome of faba bean responding to O. foetida parasitism. In this study, we employed RNA sequencing to explore the global gene expression changes associated with compatible and incompatible V. faba/O. foetida interactions. In this perspective, two faba bean varieties (susceptible and resistant) were examined at the root level across three stages of O. foetida development (Before Germination (BG), After Germination (AG) and Tubercule Stage (TS)). Our analyses presented an exploration of the transcriptomic profile, including comprehensive assessments of differential gene expression and Gene Ontology (GO) enrichment analyses. Specifically, we investigated key pathways revealing the complexity of molecular responses to O. foetida attack. In this study, we detected differential gene expression of pathways associated with secondary metabolites: flavonoids, auxin, thiamine, and jasmonic acid. To enhance our understanding of the global changes in V. faba response to O. foetida, we specifically examined WRKY genes known to play a role in plant host-parasitic plant interactions. Furthermore, considering the pivotal role of parasitic plant seed germination in this interaction, we investigated genes involved in the orobanchol biosynthesis pathway. Interestingly, we detected the gene expression of VuCYP722C homolog, coding for a key enzyme involved in orobanchol biosynthesis, exclusively in the susceptible host. Clearly, this study enriches our understanding of the V. faba/O. foetida interaction, shedding light on the main differences between susceptible and resistant faba bean varieties during O. foetida infestation at the gene expression level.
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.