Proteome analysis of embryo and endosperm from germinating tomato seeds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Proteome analysis of embryo and endosperm tissues from germinating tomato seed was conducted using 1-DE, 2-DE, and MS. Mobilization of the most abundant proteins, which showed similar profiles in the two tissues, occurred first in the endosperm. CBB R-250 staining of 2-DE gels revealed 352 and 369 major protein spots in the embryo and endosperm, respectively, at 0 h. Of these, 75 major spots were selected, excised, in-gel digested with trypsin, and analyzed by MALDI-TOF-MS and/or LC-ESI-Q/TOF-MS/MS. Peptide MS and MS/MS data were searched against publicly available protein and EST databases, and 47 proteins identified. Embryo-specific proteins included a BAC19.13 homologue, whereas four proteins specific to the endosperm were tomato mosaic virus coat proteins related to defense mechanisms. The most abundant proteins both in the embryo and endosperm were seed storage proteins, i.e., legumins (11 spots), vicilins (11 spots), albumin (2 spots). Housekeeping enzymes, actin-binding profilin, defense-related protein kinases, nonspecific lipid transfer protein, and proteins involved in general metabolism were also identified. The roles of some of the proteins identified in the embryo and endosperm are discussed in relation to seed germination in tomato.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".