Comparative proteomic analysis of chestnut blight fungus,<i>Cryphonectria parasitica</i>, under tannic-acid-inducing and hypovirus-regulating conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chestnut blight fungus, Cryphonectria parasitica , and its hypovirus present a useful model system for investigating the mechanisms of hypoviral infection. To identify gene products associated with fungal pathogenicity and hypoviral regulation, we attempted a proteomic analysis of the virus-free EP155/2 strain and its isogenic virus-infected UEP1 strain in response to tannic acid (TA), which is abundant in the bark of chestnut trees. In this study, pretreatment of mycelia grown on TA-supplemented media was developed for proteomic analysis. Approximately 704 proteins from the mycelia of the EP155/2 strain were reproducibly present in 3 independent extractions. Among these, 111 and 79 spots were found to be responsive to hypovirus infection and TA supplementation, respectively. The TA-grown UEP1 strain yielded 28 spots showing an expression pattern different from that of untreated UEP1. Thirty protein spots showing considerable differences in spot density were selected for further analysis. Hybrid tandem LC-MS/MS spectrometry of the 30 selected protein spots revealed that 29 were identified while 1 was unidentified. Among the identified 29 proteins, 15 were metabolic enzymes; 5 were stress-related, of which 4 were heat-shock proteins and 1 was glutathione S-transferase; 5 were signaling and cellular process-related proteins; 2 were structural proteins; and 2 matched proteins of hypothetical genes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.000 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".