Paper · 1998 · Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry

Altered Amino Acid Metabolism in Root-Knot Nematode Inoculated Cotton Plants

Paul A. Hedin; Roy G. Creech

6
claims
18
verbatim quotes
6
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

The root-knot nematode (RKN), Meloidogyne incognita (Kofoid and White) Chitwood, is a sedentary endoparasite that retards growth and development of cotton, Gossypium spp. L., by attacking the root system, causing galling, stunting, and other adverse effects. All commercial cultivars have susceptibility to RKN, although they vary in degree of susceptibility. Plant breeding has led to the development of resistant germplasm. Subsequent work has indicated that the mechanism of resistance may involve two major genes and that resistant lines may produce a unique 14 kDa protein. In the present study, the protein content of roots increased more in a susceptible line than in a resistant line after inoculation with RKN. The mole ratios of individual amino acids in RKN infected roots also were different from those of uninfected roots, and changes due to infection were greater in the susceptible line than in the resistant line. The results indicate protein synthesis in roots is modified by RKN. Alternatively, increases in protein content may be attributed in part to RKN protein. Cellulose was lower after infection in both susceptible and resistant lines. Keywords: Root-knot nematode; Meloidogyne incognita; cotton; Gossypium spp.; amino acids; protein; cellulose

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 6

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

After nematode inoculation, root protein content increased more in the susceptible cotton line than in the resistant line.

Material
susceptible linee2
Treatment
inoculation with RKNe2
Interactor
Meloidogyne incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae0pathogen
Outcome
protein content of rootse2
Direction
increased moree2
Comparator
resistant linee2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Meloidogyne incognita
Meloidogyne incognita · InteractorPhoto by William Wergin and Richard Sayre. Colorized by Stephen Ausmus. U.S. Department of Agriculture · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Meloidogyne incognita (Kofoid and White) Chitwood”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 30–79 · show in text ↑
e1

“cotton, Gossypium spp. L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 148–173 · show in text ↑
e2

“the protein content of roots increased more in a susceptible line than in a resistant line after inoculation with RKN”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 601–718 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Amino acid mole ratios differed between infected and uninfected cotton roots.

Treatment
RKN infectede2
Interactor
Meloidogyne incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae1pathogen
Outcome
mole ratios of individual amino acidse2
Direction
differente2
Comparator
uninfected rootse2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Meloidogyne incognita
Meloidogyne incognita · InteractorPhoto by William Wergin and Richard Sayre. Colorized by Stephen Ausmus. U.S. Department of Agriculture · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“cotton, Gossypium spp. L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 148–173 · show in text ↑
e1

“Meloidogyne incognita (Kofoid and White) Chitwood”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 30–79 · show in text ↑
e2

“The mole ratios of individual amino acids in RKN infected roots also were different from those of uninfected roots”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 720–834 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Infection-related amino acid changes were greater in the susceptible than the resistant cotton line.

Material
susceptible linee2
Interactor
Meloidogyne incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae1pathogen
Outcome
changes due to infectione2
Direction
greatere2
Comparator
resistant linee2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Meloidogyne incognita
Meloidogyne incognita · InteractorPhoto by William Wergin and Richard Sayre. Colorized by Stephen Ausmus. U.S. Department of Agriculture · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“cotton, Gossypium spp. L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 148–173 · show in text ↑
e1

“Meloidogyne incognita (Kofoid and White) Chitwood”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 30–79 · show in text ↑
e2

“changes due to infection were greater in the susceptible line than in the resistant line”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 840–928 · show in text ↑
Mechanismauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The authors infer that nematode infection modifies protein synthesis in cotton roots.

Interactor
Meloidogyne incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae1pathogen
Outcome
protein synthesis in rootse2
Qualifier
modified by RKNe2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Meloidogyne incognita
Meloidogyne incognita · InteractorPhoto by William Wergin and Richard Sayre. Colorized by Stephen Ausmus. U.S. Department of Agriculture · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“cotton, Gossypium spp. L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 148–173 · show in text ↑
e1

“Meloidogyne incognita (Kofoid and White) Chitwood”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 30–79 · show in text ↑
e2

“The results indicate protein synthesis in roots is modified by RKN.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 930–997 · show in text ↑
Mechanismhypothesisoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The authors offer nematode protein as a possible contributor to increased root protein content.

Interactor
Meloidogyne incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae1pathogen
Outcome
increases in protein contente2
Qualifier
RKN proteine2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Meloidogyne incognita
Meloidogyne incognita · InteractorPhoto by William Wergin and Richard Sayre. Colorized by Stephen Ausmus. U.S. Department of Agriculture · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“cotton, Gossypium spp. L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 148–173 · show in text ↑
e1

“Meloidogyne incognita (Kofoid and White) Chitwood”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 30–79 · show in text ↑
e2

“increases in protein content may be attributed in part to RKN protein”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1013–1082 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Root cellulose was lower after nematode infection in both susceptible and resistant cotton lines.

Treatment
infectione2
Interactor
Meloidogyne incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae1pathogen
Outcome
Cellulosee2
Direction
lowere2
Qualifier
both susceptible and resistant linese2

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Meloidogyne incognita
Meloidogyne incognita · InteractorPhoto by William Wergin and Richard Sayre. Colorized by Stephen Ausmus. U.S. Department of Agriculture · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“cotton, Gossypium spp. L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 148–173 · show in text ↑
e1

“Meloidogyne incognita (Kofoid and White) Chitwood”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 30–79 · show in text ↑
e2

“Cellulose was lower after infection in both susceptible and resistant lines.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1084–1160 · show in text ↑

infection · Meloidogyne incognita · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

4 papers: 1 positive, 3 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative
See all 4 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.