↓ Skip to main content

Comparative transcriptome analysis of Gossypium hirsutumL. in response to sap sucking insects: aphid and whitefly

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
69 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
90 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Comparative transcriptome analysis of Gossypium hirsutumL. in response to sap sucking insects: aphid and whitefly
Published in
BMC Genomics, April 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2164-14-241
Pubmed ID
Authors

Neeraj Kumar Dubey, Ridhi Goel, Alok Ranjan, Asif Idris, Sunil Kumar Singh, Sumit K Bag, Krishnappa Chandrashekar, Kapil Deo Pandey, Pradhyumna Kumar Singh, Samir V Sawant

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) is a major fiber crop that is grown worldwide; it faces extensive damage from sap-sucking insects, including aphids and whiteflies. Genome-wide transcriptome analysis was performed to understand the molecular details of interaction between Gossypium hirsutum L. and sap-sucking pests, namely Aphis gossypii (Aphid) and Bemisia tabacci (Whiteflies). Roche's GS-Titanium was used to sequence transcriptomes of cotton infested with aphids and whiteflies for 2 h and 24 h. RESULTS: A total of 100935 contigs were produced with an average length of 529 bp after an assembly in all five selected conditions. The Blastn of the non-redundant (nr) cotton EST database resulted in the identification of 580 novel contigs in the cotton plant. It should be noted that in spite of minimal physical damage caused by the sap-sucking insects, they can change the gene expression of plants in 2 h of infestation; further change in gene expression due to whiteflies is quicker than due to aphids. The impact of the whitefly 24 h after infestation was more or less similar to that of the aphid 2 h after infestation. Aphids and whiteflies affect many genes that are regulated by various phytohormones and in response to microbial infection, indicating the involvement of complex crosstalk between these pathways. The KOBAS analysis of differentially regulated transcripts in response to aphids and whiteflies indicated that both the insects induce the metabolism of amino acids biosynthesis specially in case of whiteflies infestation at later phase. Further we also observed that expression of transcript related to photosynthesis specially carbon fixation were significantly influenced by infestation of Aphids and Whiteflies. CONCLUSIONS: A comparison of different transcriptomes leads to the identification of differentially and temporally regulated transcripts in response to infestation by aphids and whiteflies. Most of these differentially expressed contigs were related to genes involved in biotic, abiotic stresses and enzymatic activities related to hydrolases, transferases, and kinases. The expression of some marker genes such as the overexpressors of cationic peroxidase 3, lipoxygenase I, TGA2, and non-specific lipase, which are involved in phytohormonal-mediated plant resistance development, was suppressed after infestation by aphids and whiteflies, indicating that insects suppressed plant resistance in order to facilitate their infestation. We also concluded that cotton shares several pathways such as phagosomes, RNA transport, and amino acid metabolism with Arabidopsis in response to the infestation by aphids and whiteflies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Netherlands 1 1%
Australia 1 1%
Unknown 85 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 26%
Researcher 19 21%
Student > Master 8 9%
Student > Bachelor 4 4%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 4%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 20 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 49 54%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 11%
Environmental Science 4 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 1%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 1%
Other 1 1%
Unknown 24 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 April 2013.
All research outputs
#18,698,279
of 23,173,635 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#8,219
of 10,715 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#152,291
of 200,564 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#97
of 122 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,173,635 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,715 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 200,564 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 122 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.