ArticleBMC plant biology2026
Dual RNA-seq analysis reveals differences in defensive lncRNA expression in Pinus spp. with varying susceptibility to Fusarium circinatum.
Article in BMC plant biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLong non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) are emerging regulators of plant immunity, but their roles in conifer-pathogen interactions remain largely unexplored. We applied a dual RNA-seq approach to resistant Pinus pinea and susceptible P. radiata challenged with Fusarium circinatum at 4 dpi, and concurrently profiled fungal lncRNAs.
resultsUsing a conservative multi-tool pipeline, we identified 8,783 lncRNAs in P. radiata, 5,255 in P. pinea, and 1,020 in F. circinatum. Pine lncRNAs displayed canonical features (shorter length, fewer/shorter exons, intergenic dominance) and limited primary-sequence conservation. Differential expression analysis revealed 37 (P. radiata) and 34 (P. pinea) infection-responsive lncRNAs. Predicted cis targets in P. radiata were enriched for energy/redox and gibberellin-related functions, whereas P. pinea targets pointed to TCA/redox and translation control. Weighted gene co-expression analysis placed P. radiata lncRNAs in defence-like modules without significant infection association, while P. pinea lncRNAs clustered into two modules with opposite associations to infection: one that increased and was enriched for immunity, flavonoid biosynthesis, and cell-wall processes, and another that decreased and was linked to photosynthesis and chloroplast functions. On the pathogen side, infection of the resistant host triggered distinct F. circinatum lncRNAs linked to transcriptional control and putative cis activation of cell-wall-degrading and toxin-biosynthetic genes, alongside down-regulation near ergosterol-biosynthetic loci. By contrast, during infection of the susceptible host, species-associated modules were dominated by translation-related functions.
conclusionsTogether, these results define a non-coding regulatory layer that differentiates resistance and susceptibility strategies in the Pinus-F. circinatum pathosystem, provide the first lncRNA catalogues for P. pinea and F. circinatum, and deliver testable candidates for functional validation and biomarker development in forest disease management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.