By organism › Bacteria › Rhizobiaceae › Agrobacterium

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bacilysin suppressed Agrobacterium growth.

Taxon: AgrobacteriumAgrobacteriume0
Treatment: bacilysine0
Outcome: growth of Agrobacteriume0
Direction: suppresse0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“bacilysin and difficidin can also suppress the growth of Agrobacterium.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1121–1192

Title

Four Antimicrobial Compounds and ISR Induction are Involved in Biocontrol of Crown Gall Disease by the Plant Beneficial Rhizobacterium Bacillus velezensis FZB42

Xu Qin; Yueting Xiao; Qin Xiong; et al. Plant Disease 2025. doi:10.1094/pdis-10-24-2085-re

Other claims from this paper (7)

Intervention effect Loss of antimicrobial compound production reduced FZB42 mutant inhibition of A. tumefaciens XYT-58.
Intervention effect Those FZB42 mutants had reduced ability to control crown gall in cherry.
Intervention effect Purified bacilysin inhibited XYT-58 growth in vitro.
Intervention effect Purified surfactin inhibited XYT-58 growth in vitro.
Intervention effect FZB42 inoculation increased expression of jasmonic acid, ethylene and salicylic acid pathway genes in infected cherry seedlings.
Intervention effect Difficidin suppressed Agrobacterium growth.
Mechanism Multiple antimicrobial compounds and induced systemic resistance contribute to FZB42 control of crown gall.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Difficidin suppressed Agrobacterium growth.

Taxon: AgrobacteriumAgrobacteriume0
Treatment: difficidine0
Outcome: growth of Agrobacteriume0
Direction: suppresse0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“bacilysin and difficidin can also suppress the growth of Agrobacterium.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1121–1192

Title

Four Antimicrobial Compounds and ISR Induction are Involved in Biocontrol of Crown Gall Disease by the Plant Beneficial Rhizobacterium Bacillus velezensis FZB42

Xu Qin; Yueting Xiao; Qin Xiong; et al. Plant Disease 2025. doi:10.1094/pdis-10-24-2085-re

Other claims from this paper (7)

Intervention effect Loss of antimicrobial compound production reduced FZB42 mutant inhibition of A. tumefaciens XYT-58.
Intervention effect Those FZB42 mutants had reduced ability to control crown gall in cherry.
Intervention effect Purified bacilysin inhibited XYT-58 growth in vitro.
Intervention effect Purified surfactin inhibited XYT-58 growth in vitro.
Intervention effect FZB42 inoculation increased expression of jasmonic acid, ethylene and salicylic acid pathway genes in infected cherry seedlings.
Intervention effect Bacilysin suppressed Agrobacterium growth.
Mechanism Multiple antimicrobial compounds and induced systemic resistance contribute to FZB42 control of crown gall.

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Transcriptome profiles depended on chromosome architecture.

Taxon: AgrobacteriumAgrobacteriume0 t0
Outcome: gene expression patternse0
Qualifier: architecture-dependente0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0
“Whole-transcriptome analysis revealed architecture-dependent gene expression patterns”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 914–999

t0
“Agrobacterium tumefaciens C58”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 65–94

Title

Chromosome architecture affects virulence and competitiveness in Agrobacterium tumefaciens C58

Ephraim Aliu; Keunsub Lee; Ram Sanath-Kumar; et al. Science Advances 2025. doi:10.1126/sciadv.adx7408

Other claims from this paper (5)

Intervention effect Single-chromosome strains grew faster.
Observation Single-chromosome strains had enhanced stress tolerance.
Observation Single-chromosome strains had greater interstrain competitiveness.
Observation Bipartite chromosome strains had higher virulence gene expression.
Method / resource Bipartite chromosome strains enhanced transient plant transformation efficiency.

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Agrobacterium transcriptomes differed by 762 genes between tea and tobacco groups at day 0.

Taxon: AgrobacteriumAgrobacteriume0
Interactor: teae0host
Outcome: differentially expressed genes (DEGs)e0
Value: 762e0
Qualifier: 0e0
Comparator: tobacco groupe0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0
“RNA sequencing and transcriptomic analysis on Agrobacterium at 0, 3 and 4 days after leaf post-inoculation resulted in 762, 1923 and 1656 differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between the tea group and the tobacco group, respectively.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 665–899

Title

Comparative Transcriptome Analysis of Agrobacterium tumefaciens Reveals the Molecular Basis for the Recalcitrant Genetic Transformation of Camellia sinensis L.

Ke Jin; Na Tian; Jorge Freire da Silva Ferreira; et al. Biomolecules 2022. doi:10.3390/biom12050688

Other claims from this paper (7)

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Agrobacterium transcriptomes differed by 1923 genes between tea and tobacco groups at day 3.

Taxon: AgrobacteriumAgrobacteriume0
Interactor: teae0host
Outcome: differentially expressed genes (DEGs)e0
Value: 1923e0
Qualifier: 3e0
Comparator: tobacco groupe0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0
“RNA sequencing and transcriptomic analysis on Agrobacterium at 0, 3 and 4 days after leaf post-inoculation resulted in 762, 1923 and 1656 differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between the tea group and the tobacco group, respectively.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 665–899

Title

Comparative Transcriptome Analysis of Agrobacterium tumefaciens Reveals the Molecular Basis for the Recalcitrant Genetic Transformation of Camellia sinensis L.

Ke Jin; Na Tian; Jorge Freire da Silva Ferreira; et al. Biomolecules 2022. doi:10.3390/biom12050688

Other claims from this paper (7)

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Agrobacterium transcriptomes differed by 1656 genes between tea and tobacco groups at day 4.

Taxon: AgrobacteriumAgrobacteriume0
Interactor: teae0host
Outcome: differentially expressed genes (DEGs)e0
Value: 1656e0
Qualifier: 4e0
Comparator: tobacco groupe0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0
“RNA sequencing and transcriptomic analysis on Agrobacterium at 0, 3 and 4 days after leaf post-inoculation resulted in 762, 1923 and 1656 differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between the tea group and the tobacco group, respectively.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 665–899

Title

Comparative Transcriptome Analysis of Agrobacterium tumefaciens Reveals the Molecular Basis for the Recalcitrant Genetic Transformation of Camellia sinensis L.

Ke Jin; Na Tian; Jorge Freire da Silva Ferreira; et al. Biomolecules 2022. doi:10.3390/biom12050688

Other claims from this paper (7)

Observationauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

All isolates were interpreted as root endophytic bacteria.

Taxon: Agrobacterium spp.Agrobacteriumt0
Outcome: root endophytic bacteriae0

Verbatim

e0
“These results have suggested that all these isolates are root endophytic bacteria.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 405–487

t0
“Agrobacterium spp.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 46–64

Title

Molecular Characterization of Some Saprophyte Agrobacterium spp. Strains Isolated from Root Nodules of C. arietinum L. Cultivated in Central Anatolia Region of Turkey

Cem Tolga GÜRKANLI Journal of Anatolian Environmental and Animal Sciences 2020. doi:10.35229/jaes.744909

Other claims from this paper (8)

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

PCR amplification of nodD and virA yielded no bands.

Taxon: Agrobacterium spp.Agrobacteriumt0
Gene: nodD and virAe0
Outcome: did not revealed any bandse0

Verbatim

e0
“Additionally, PCR amplifications for nodD and virA genes did not revealed any bands.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 488–572

t0
“Agrobacterium spp.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 46–64

Title

Molecular Characterization of Some Saprophyte Agrobacterium spp. Strains Isolated from Root Nodules of C. arietinum L. Cultivated in Central Anatolia Region of Turkey

Cem Tolga GÜRKANLI Journal of Anatolian Environmental and Animal Sciences 2020. doi:10.35229/jaes.744909

Other claims from this paper (8)

Observationauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The isolates were interpreted as lacking symbiotic and pathogenicity plasmids needed for nodulation or virulence.

Taxon: Agrobacterium spp.Agrobacteriumt0
Outcome: have not harbour symbiotic (pSym) or pathogenicity (Ti: Tumor inducing or Ri: Root inducing) plasmidse0

Verbatim

e0
“These results showed that these isolates have not harbour symbiotic (pSym) or pathogenicity (Ti: Tumor inducing or Ri: Root inducing) plasmids which are necessary for nodulation or virulence, respectively.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 573–778

t0
“Agrobacterium spp.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 46–64

Title

Molecular Characterization of Some Saprophyte Agrobacterium spp. Strains Isolated from Root Nodules of C. arietinum L. Cultivated in Central Anatolia Region of Turkey

Cem Tolga GÜRKANLI Journal of Anatolian Environmental and Animal Sciences 2020. doi:10.35229/jaes.744909

Other claims from this paper (8)

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

TP-RAPD distinguished three genetically distinct isolate groups.

Taxon: Agrobacterium spp.Agrobacteriumt0
Outcome: genetically distinct groupe0
Value: threee0

Verbatim

e0
“TP-RAPD analysis revealed three patterns indicating three genetically distinct group within the isolate collection.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 779–894

t0
“Agrobacterium spp.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 46–64

Title

Molecular Characterization of Some Saprophyte Agrobacterium spp. Strains Isolated from Root Nodules of C. arietinum L. Cultivated in Central Anatolia Region of Turkey

Cem Tolga GÜRKANLI Journal of Anatolian Environmental and Animal Sciences 2020. doi:10.35229/jaes.744909

Other claims from this paper (8)

Agrobacterium 30 claims

30 claims