MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1485497853 · doi:10.1007/978-3-540-74051-3_26

Quantifying the Impact of ACC Deaminase-Containing Bacteria on Plants

2007· book-chapter· en· W1485497853 on OpenAlexaff
Donna M. Penrose, Bernard R. Glick

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLegume Nitrogen Fixing Symbiosis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthylenePseudomonas putidaGermination1-Aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylic acidBacteriaChemistrySeedlingEnzymeHorticultureBiologyBiochemistryCatalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1994, we reported that the bacterium, Pseudomonas putida GR12-2 (Lifshitz et al. 1986), a well-known plant growth promoting strain, contained the enzyme, 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylic acid (ACC) deaminase (Jacobson et al. 1994). This enzyme hydrolyzes ACC, the immediate precursor of ethylene, in plant tissues (Yang and Hoffman 1984). Ethylene is required for seed germination by many plant species and the rate of ethylene production increases during germination and seedling growth (Abeles et al. 1992). Although low levels of ethylene appear to enhance root initiation and growth, and promote root extension, high levels of ethylene produced by fast growing roots can lead to inhibition of root elongation (Mattoo and Suttle 1991;Ma et al. 1998).We have proposed a model that suggests that ACC deaminase-containing plant growth promoting bacteria can lower ethylene levels and thus stimulate plant growth (Glick et al. 1998). It is quite likely that much of the ACC produced during ethylene biosynthesis is taken up by the bacterium and subsequently hydrolyzed to α-ketobutyrate and ammonia by ACC deaminase. The uptake and cleavage of ACC by ACC deaminase would decrease the amount of ACC, as well as ethylene.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.086
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.205 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLegume Nitrogen Fixing SymbiosisFrench-language works237,207