Results 311 to 320 of about 75,766 (335)
Some of the next articles are maybe not open access.
The Virulence System of Agrobacterium Tumefaciens
Annual Review of Phytopathology, 1993The gram-negative soil bacterium Agrobacterium tumefaciens causes the plant disease crown gall. This disease is characterized by the formation of tumors or crown galls at wound sites of infected dicotyledonous plants (for recent reviews see Kado, 1991; Winans, 1992; Zambryski, 1992; Hooykaas and Schilperoort, 1992). During tumor induction Agrobacterium
Paul J. J. Hooykaas, Alice Beijersbergen
openaire +2 more sources
Electrotransformation of Agrobacterium tumefaciens and A. rhizogenes
2000Agrobacterium tumefaciens is routinely used to transfer DNA into plants (e.g. reviewed by Hooykaas 1989). Naturally, this process is brought about by a class of plasmids called Ti (tumour inducing). Similarly, A. rhizogenes strains contain an Ri (root inducing) plasmid.
Diethard Mattanovich, Florian Rüker
openaire +2 more sources
Biotypes of Agrobacterium tumefaciens in Hungary [PDF]
Isolates of Agrobacterium tumefaciens from Hungary were separated into three biotypes on the basis of their physiological characters. Biotypes 1 and 2 corresponded with those of Keane et al. (1970). The most common isolates were of biotype 2. Isolates from grapevines formed a separate biotype which might be distinguished from biotype 1 by D‐(–)tartrate
openaire +1 more source
Transformation of the monocotyledonous Alstroemeria by Agrobacterium tumefaciens
Plant Cell Reports, 2004An efficient procedure is described for the transformation of the monocotyledonous Alstroemeria by Agrobacterium tumefaciens via callus regeneration. Calli derived from ovules were co-cultivated with A. tumefaciens strains EHA101 and LBA4404, which harbored the binary vector plasmids pIG121Hm and pTOK233, respectively.
Hiroji Sato+2 more
openaire +3 more sources
Perception of Agrobacterium tumefaciens flagellin by FLS2XL confers resistance to crown gall disease
Nature Plants, 2020Ursula B. Fürst+5 more
semanticscholar +1 more source
Agrobacterium tumefaciens Peritonitis Mimicking Tuberculosis
Clinical Infectious Diseases, 1992Agrobacterium species have been previously implicated in the development of clinical disease. We report what we believe to be the first case of ascites caused by Agrobacterium tumefaciens in a cirrhotic patient. Since the correct diagnosis was made only after laparoscopy-guided collection of specimens from two different tissues, we suggest that ...
Zahid A. Saeed+4 more
openaire +3 more sources
Electron microscopy of phages for Agrobacterium tumefaciens
Archiv f�r Mikrobiologie, 1970Bacteriophages for three strains of A. tumefaciens were concentrated by ultracentrifugation, stained with 1% phosphotungstic acid (PTA), or 0.5% uranyl acetate, and examined with the electron microscope. Phage PT11 was a bacillary-shaped particle with a whip-like tail containing a knob at its distal end.
R. J. Boyd+2 more
openaire +3 more sources
Transformation Mediated by Agrobacterium tumefaciens
2004The soil bacterium Agrobacterium tumefaciens can be used nowadays as a vector for the genetic transformation of organisms as diverse as plants, yeasts, and filamentous fungi. For a century this bacterium has been recognized as the etiological agent of the plant disease crown gall, a disease characterized by tumorous overgrowths that occur mostly on the
openaire +2 more sources
Attachment of Agrobacterium Tumefaciens to Host Cells
1987The first step in tumor formation by Agrobacterium tumefaciens is the site specific attachment of the bacteria to plant cells in the wounded plant (1, 2, 3). We have observed a similar attachment interaction when the bacteria are incubated with tissue culture cells or protoplasts (4, 5).
Ann G. Matthysse, Vincent T. Wagner
openaire +2 more sources
The Susceptibility of Monocotyledons to Agrobacterium tumefaciens
Journal of Phytopathology, 1985AbstractThe susceptibility of 257 monocotyledon species belonging to 139 genera and 27 families, has been tested and the literature on this subject reviewed. In contrast with dicotyledons and gymnosperms, monocotyledons are much less susceptible to Agrobacterium tumefaciens: only 3 % of the species of monocotyledons tested were host plants, whereas 60 %
openaire +2 more sources