MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1795907959 · doi:10.1080/15592324.2015.1042639

Membrane-associated virus replication complexes locate to plant conducting tubes

2015· article· en· W1795907959 on OpenAlexaff
Juan Wan, Jean‐François Laliberté

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Signaling & Behavior · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsArmand Frappier MuseumInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlasmodesmaBiologyXylemCell biologyTurnip mosaic virusPlant virusViral replicationPlant cellPhloemApoplastVascular tissueSieve tube elementInnate immune systemVascular bundleVirologyVirusBotanyImmune systemCell wallCytoplasmPotyvirusBiochemistryGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is generally accepted that in order to establish a systemic infection in a plant, viruses move from the initially infected cell to the vascular tissues by cell-to-cell movement through plasmodesmata (PD), and load into the vascular conducting tubes (i.e. phloem sieve elements and xylem vessel elements) for long-distance movement. The viral unit in these movements can be a virion or a yet-to-be-defined ribonucleic protein (RNP) complex. Using live-cell imaging, our laboratory has previously demonstrated that membrane-bound replication complexes move cell-to-cell during turnip mosaic virus (TuMV) infection. Our recent study shows that these membrane-bound replication complexes end up in the vascular conducting tubes, which is likely the case for potato virus X (PVX) also. The presence of TuMV-induced membrane complexes in xylem vessels suggests that viral components could also be found in other apoplastic regions of the plant, such as the intercellular space. This possibility may have implications regarding how we approach the study of plant innate immune responses against viruses.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.555

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.246
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.078 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations16
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant Signaling & BehaviorSame topicPlant Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207