MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Dynamics of <i>MONOPTEROS</i> and PIN‐FORMED1 expression during leaf vein pattern formation in <i>Arabidopsis thaliana</i>

2007· article· en· W1601614441 on OpenAlexaff
Carol L. Wenzel, Mathias Schuetz, Qian Yu, Jim Mattsson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Plant Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Molecular Biology Research
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAuxinArabidopsisPrimordiumArabidopsis thalianaCell biologyPIN1MutantBiologyGeneGene expressionGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Genetic evidence links the Arabidopsis MONOPTEROS (MP) and PIN-FORMED1 (PIN1) genes to the patterning of leaf veins. To elucidate their potential functions and interactions in this process, we have assessed the dynamics of MP and PIN1 expression during vascular patterning in Arabidopsis leaf primordia. Both genes undergo a dynamic process of gradual refinement of expression into files one to two cells wide before overt vascular differentiation. The subcellular distribution of PIN1 is also gradually refined from a non-polar distribution in isodiametric cells to strongly polarized in elongated procambial cells and provides an indication of overall directions of auxin flow. We found evidence that MP expression can be activated by auxin exposure and that PIN1 as well as DR5::GUS expression is defective in mp mutant leaves. Taken together the results suggest a feedback regulatory loop that involves auxin, MP and PIN1 and provide novel experimental support for the canalization-of-auxin-flow hypothesis.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations270
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Plant JournalSame topicPlant Molecular Biology ResearchFrench-language works237,207