MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1587496288 · doi:10.1002/9781118382806.ch12

Role of Phloem Metabolites in Plant Defense

2012· other· en· W1587496288 on OpenAlexaff
Jillian M. Hagel, Akpevwe Onoyovwi, Edward C. Yeung, Peter J. Facchini

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBotanical Research and Chemistry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhloemSieve tube elementBiologyBotanyBrassicaceaePlant defense against herbivoryBiochemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The primary function of phloem is nutrient translocation, yet cell types within this tissue have been implicated as important contributors to the synthesis, distribution, and release of myriad defense compounds in many plants. This chapter presents examples of selected phloem metabolites with putative or established roles in plant-insect interactions. Toxic quinolizidine alkaloids are associated with the phloem of wild lupins and prevent the feeding of most generalist insects. Other defensive metabolites found in sieve-tube sap include glucosinolates, which are sulfur- and nitrogen-rich specialized metabolites that accumulate in many members of the Brassicaceae. In all conifers studied to date, phloem has been found to contain specialized axial parenchyma cells that produce and accumulate defensive phenolic compounds within their vacuoles. The accumulation of defensive metabolites in sieve-tube sap, laticifers, and resin ducts exposed to insects and microbial pathogens is often the final step of a complex series of biochemical events.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBotanical Research and ChemistryFrench-language works237,207