MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1922072357 · doi:10.1139/b11-053

Expression patterns of nitrate, phosphate, and sulfate transporters in <i>Arabidopsis</i> roots exposed to different nutritional regimes

2011· article· en· W1922072357 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shengjie Bao, Lijun An, Sha Su, Zhongjing Zhou, Yinbo Gan

Bibliographic record

VenueBotany · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant nutrient uptake and metabolism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArabidopsisNitrateTransporterPhosphateNutrientArabidopsis thalianaSulfateBiologySulfurBiochemistryStarvation responseBotanyCell biologyChemistryGeneMutantEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nitrate transporter AtNRT2.1 is the key component of the inducible high-affinity nitrate transport system in Arabidopsis thaliana . AtNRT2.1 is primarily expressed in roots and known to be mainly involved under fluctuating nitrogen supply conditions. It is still unknown whether AtNRT2.1 is involved in plant responses to other nutrient fluctuations. In this study, we found that the expression of AtNRT2.1 was also upregulated by phosphate and sulfate resupply, which may indicate a novel role in regulating phosphate and sulfate responses. Our study also demonstrated that expression of the major Pi transporter (Pht1) family member, AtPHT1;2, was suppressed by nitrate starvation and induced by nitrate resupply and sulfate starvation in comparison to the continuous nutrient treatment. Moreover, this study also showed that expression of sulfur transporter SULTR1;1 and AtNRT2.1 was suppressed by complete nutrient starvation and induced by complete nutrient resupply. These novel results provide strong evidence that there is crosstalk among the nitrate, sulfate, and phosphate transporters in regulating different nutrient fluctuations in Arabidopsis roots.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.625
Threshold uncertainty score0.200

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.173 · 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

Citations33
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBotanySame topicPlant nutrient uptake and metabolismFrench-language works237,207