MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1527966771 · doi:10.3389/fpls.2015.00507

Harnessing phytomicrobiome signaling for rhizosphere microbiome engineering

2015· review· en· W1527966771 on OpenAlexaff
Liliana Quiza, Marc St‐Arnaud, Étienne Yergeau

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Plant Science · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant-Microbe Interactions and Immunity
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrobiomeRhizosphereAbiotic componentBiologyAbiotic stressMetagenomicsBiotechnologyComputational biologyEcologyBioinformaticsGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of microbiome engineering is to manipulate the microbiome toward a certain type of community that will optimize plant functions of interest. For instance, in crop production the goal is to reduce disease susceptibility, increase nutrient availability increase abiotic stress tolerance and increase crop yields. Various approaches can be devised to engineer the plant-microbiome, but one particularly promising approach is to take advantage of naturally evolved plant-microbiome communication channels. This is, however, very challenging as the understanding of the plant-microbiome communication is still mostly rudimentary and plant-microbiome interactions varies between crops species (and even cultivars), between individual members of the microbiome and with environmental conditions. In each individual case, many aspects of the plant-microorganisms relationship should be thoroughly scrutinized. In this article we summarize some of the existing plant-microbiome engineering studies and point out potential avenues for further research.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations222
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Plant ScienceSame topicPlant-Microbe Interactions and ImmunityFrench-language works237,207