MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1809622449 · doi:10.1080/19420889.2015.1059979

Communication is key: Reducing DEK1 activity reveals a link between cell-cell contacts and epidermal cell differentiation status

2015· article· en· W1809622449 on OpenAlexaff
R Galletti, Gwyneth Ingram

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunicative & Integrative Biology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Molecular Biology Research
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nautical Research Society
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpidermis (zoology)Cellular differentiationCell biologyTranscription factorBiologyCellStem cellArabidopsisGene expressionGeneGeneticsAnatomyMutant

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plant epidermis development requires not only the initial acquisition of tissue identity, but also the ability to differentiate specific cell types over time and to maintain these differentiated states throughout the plant life. To set-up and maintain differentiation, plants activate specific transcriptional programs. Interfering with these programs can prevent differentiation and/or force differentiated cells to lose their identity and re-enter a proliferative state. We have recently shown that the Arabidopsis Defective Kernel 1 (DEK1) protein is required both for the differentiation of epidermal cells and for the maintenance of their fully differentiated state. Defects in DEK1 activity lead to a deregulation of the expression of epidermis-specific differentiation-promoting HD-ZIP IV transcription factors. Here we propose a working model in which DEK1, by maintaining cell-cell contacts, and thus communication between neighboring cells, influences HD-ZIP IV gene expression and epidermis differentiation.

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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations16
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunicative & Integrative BiologySame topicPlant Molecular Biology ResearchFrench-language works237,207