MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968221876 · doi:10.1104/pp.111.192856

A Novel Method of Transgene Delivery into Triticale Plants Using the <i>Agrobacterium</i> Transferred DNA-Derived Nano-Complex 

2012· article· en· W1968221876 on OpenAlexaff
Alicja Ziemienowicz, Youn‐Seb Shim, Aki Matsuoka, François Eudes, Igor Kovalchuk

Bibliographic record

VenuePLANT PHYSIOLOGY · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant tissue culture and regeneration
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTriticaleAgrobacteriumTransgeneBiologyGenetically modified cropsDNATransformation (genetics)BotanyBiotechnologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Genetic transformation of monocotyledonous plants still presents a challenge for plant biologists and biotechnologists because monocots are difficult to transform with Agrobacterium tumefaciens, whereas other transgenesis methods, such as gold particle-mediated transformation, result in poor transgene expression because of integration of truncated DNA molecules. We developed a method of transgene delivery into monocots. This method relies on the use of an in vitro-prepared nano-complex consisting of transferred DNA, virulence protein D2, and recombination protein A delivered to triticale microspores with the help of a Tat2 cell-penetrating peptide. We showed that this approach allowed for single transgene copy integration events and prevented degradation of delivered DNA, thus leading to the integration of intact copies of the transgene into the genome of triticale plants. This resulted in transgene expression in all transgenic plants regenerated from microspores transfected with the full transferred DNA/protein complex. This approach can easily substitute the bombardment technique currently used for monocots and will be highly valuable for plant biology and biotechnology.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.496

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations65
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLANT PHYSIOLOGYSame topicPlant tissue culture and regenerationFrench-language works237,207