Application of the NanoString nCounter System as an Alternative Method to Investigate Molecular Mechanisms Involved in Host Plant Responses to Plasmodiophora brassicae
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clubroot, caused by the soilborne pathogen Plasmodiophora brassicae, is an important disease of canola (Brassica napus) and other crucifers. The recent application of RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) technologies to study P. brassicae−host interactions has generated large amounts of gene expression data, improving knowledge of the molecular mechanisms of pathogenesis and host resistance. Quantitative PCR (qPCR) analysis has been widely applied to examine the expression of a limited number of genes and to validate the results of RNA-seq studies, but may not be ideal for analyzing larger suites of target genes or increased sample numbers. Moreover, the need for intermediate steps such as cDNA synthesis may introduce variability that could affect the accuracy of the data generated by qPCR. Here, we report the validation of gene expression data from a previous RNA-seq study of clubroot using the NanoString nCounter System, which achieves efficient gene expression quantification in a fast and simple manner. We first confirm the robustness of the NanoString system by comparing the results with those generated by qPCR and RNA-seq and then discuss the importance of some candidate genes for resistance or susceptibility to P. brassicae in the host. The results show that the expression of genes measured using NanoString have a high correlation with the values obtained using the other two technologies, with R > 0.90 and p < 0.01, and the same expression patterns for most genes. The three methods (qPCR, RNA-seq, and NanoString) were also compared in terms of laboratory procedures, time, and cost. We propose that the NanoString nCounter System is a robust, sensitive, highly reproducible, and simple technology for gene expression analysis. NanoString could become a common alternative to qPCR to validate RNA-seq data or to create panels of genes for use as markers of resistance/susceptibility when plants are challenged with different P. brassicae pathotypes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".