Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41306586›Full record

ArticleBio-protocol2025

Quantitative Analysis of the

Sakharam Waghmare, Lingfeng Xia, Suzanne McGill, Richard Burchmore, Rucha Karnik

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Bio-protocol, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Sakharam WaghmarePlant Science Group, School of Molecular Biosciences, College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Bower Building, University Avenue, Glasgow, UK.
Lingfeng XiaPlant Science Group, School of Molecular Biosciences, College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Bower Building, University Avenue, Glasgow, UK.
Suzanne McGillSchool of Infection & Immunity, College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Sir Graeme Davies Building, Gilmorehill Campus, University Place, Glasgow, UK.
Richard BurchmoreSchool of Infection & Immunity, College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Sir Graeme Davies Building, Gilmorehill Campus, University Place, Glasgow, UK.
Rucha KarnikPlant Science Group, School of Molecular Biosciences, College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Bower Building, University Avenue, Glasgow, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In plants, the apoplast contains a diverse set of proteins that underpin mechanisms for maintaining cell homeostasis, cell wall remodeling, cell signaling, and pathogen defense. Apoplast protein composition is highly regulated, primarily through the control of secretory traffic in response to endogenous and environmental factors. Dynamic changes in apoplast proteome facilitate plant survival in a changing climate. Even so, the apoplast proteome profiles in plants remain poorly characterized due to technological limitations. Recent progress in quantitative proteomics has significantly advanced the resolution of proteomic profiling in mammalian systems and has the potential for application in plant systems. In this protocol, we provide a detailed and efficient protocol for tandem mass tag (TMT)-based quantitative analysis of

Indexed as

Apoplast flush collectionArabidopsisFilter-aided sample preparation (FASP)Liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry (LC-MS)MSPepSearchProteome DiscovererQuantitative plant proteomicsSpectral libraryTandem mass tag (TMT)

Identifiers

PMID41306586
PMCPMC12645290

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.