Flower reversion in the natural allopolyploid Arabidopsis suecica
Bibliographic record
Abstract
•Flower reversion is the result of genetic or environmental effects that reverse developmental steps in the transition from the vegetative to the reproductive phase in plants. Here, we describe peculiar floral abnormalities, homeotic conversions, and flower reversion in several wild-type accessions of the natural allopolyploid Arabidopsis suecica.\n•Microscopy was used to illustrate the phenotype in detail and we experimented with varying photoperiod lengths to establish whether or not the phenotype was responsive to the environment. We also profiled the transcriptional activity of several floral regulator genes during flower reversion using real-time PCR.\n•We showed that the frequency of floral reversion was affected by day length and the position of the flower along the inflorescence axis. In reverting flowers we found unusual gene expression patterns of floral promoters and inflorescence maintenance genes, including lower mRNA levels of AGAMOUS-LIKE-24 ( AGL-24), APETALA1 ( AP1), and SHORT VEGETATIVE PHASE ( SVP), and higher mRNA levels of SUPRESSOR OF CONSTANS1 ( SOC1) compared with normal flowers\n• We conclude that the floral reversion frequency in A. suecica is susceptible to photoperiod changes, and that the floral abnormalities coincide with the competing expression of floral promoters and floral repressors in reverting floral tissue.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".