MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Partitioning of respiratory electrons in the dark in leaves of transgenic tobacco with modified levels of alternative oxidase

2005· article· en· W1970371827 on OpenAlexafffund
Robert D. Guy, Greg C. Vanlerberghe

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysiologia Plantarum · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPhotosynthetic Processes and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAlternative oxidaseNicotiana tabacumElectron transport chainRespirationFlux (metallurgy)BotanyBiologyBiochemistryChemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined tobacco ( Nicotiana tabacum cv. Petit Havana SR1) leaf respiration in the dark, utilizing both wild‐type plants and transgenic plants with increased or decreased levels of alternative oxidase (AOX) protein. AOX represents a non‐energy‐conserving branch in mitochondrial electron transport. Inhibitor studies showed that the maximum possible flux of electrons to AOX (AOX capacity) correlated with the level of AOX protein present in the different plant lines. A comparison of the plants using online 18 O isotope discrimination was done to determine whether AOX protein level would impact the actual steady‐state partitioning of electrons to AOX (AOX engagement). Under a range of pretreatment and measurement conditions, there was little if any effect of AOX protein level on the degree of engagement. This suggests that the metabolic conditions inherent to a particular growth condition and/or the biochemical regulatory properties of AOX itself are the critical factors that control partitioning. Interestingly, we found that measurement temperature and water status are parameters that may have some influence over AOX engagement.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.253

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations60
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysiologia PlantarumSame topicPhotosynthetic Processes and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207