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