Skip to main content

Table 2 Differential expression and GO term enrichment results

From: The green ash transcriptome and identification of genes responding to abiotic and biotic stresses

 

Transcripts increasing in expression

Transcripts decreasing in expression

Test

# transcripts

# Enriched GO plant slim terms

# transcripts with putative function

# transcripts

# Enriched GO plant slim terms

# transcripts with putative function

EAB - Control tissues vs Infested Tissues

6391

12

5346

6884

10

5534

EAB - Susceptible vs Resistant, Pre-EAB Feeding

750

5

460

899

2

497

EAB - Susceptible vs Resistant, Post-EAB Feeding

545

1

336

580

2

351

Cold-stressed tissues vs control tissues

3196

9

2336

456

0

342

Drought-stressed tissues vs control tissues

13

2

12

82

7

66

Heat-stressed tissues vs control tissues

502

7

386

1114

8

984

Mechanically-wounded tissues after 5 h vs control tissues

237

5

208

252

3

217

Mechanically-wounded tissues after 24 h vs control tissues

307

1

244

653

3

544

Tissues at 4 levels of ozone across 3 time pointsa

350a

15a

342a

a

  1. Statistical tests were conducted for each stress condition to determine genes with increased or decreased expression (adjusted p-value < 0.01). These genes were assessed for shared biological processes or molecular functions via ontology enrichment based on the subset of GO plant slim terms
  2. aTranscripts responsive to ozone. A likelihood ratio test was used to identify any transcripts responsive to ozone treatment across multiple time points, allowing PUTs with more complex patterns, for example initially up regulated, then down regulated, to be included