MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982730470 · doi:10.1139/b01-117

Elements present in mineral nutrient reserves in dry <i>Arabidopsis thaliana</i> seeds of wild type and <i>pho</i>1, <i>pho</i>2, and <i>man</i>1 mutants

2001· article· en· W1982730470 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
John N. A. Lott, Marcia West

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Botany · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPhytase and its Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMutantArabidopsis thalianaArabidopsisNutrientWild typeBotanyPhosphatePhosphorusChemistryHorticultureDry weightBiologyPotassiumInositolBiochemistryGeneEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Comparison of wild type and mutants of Arabidopsis thaliana offers an opportunity to study the genetic control of nutrient storage in seeds. We used energy dispersive X-ray analysis to determine the elements present and their relative amounts in globoids of dry wild-type seeds, as well as seeds of a reduced total P uptake mutant (pho1), a phosphate accumulator (pho2), and a metal accumulator (man1). Globoids are spherical inclusions, rich in phytate that function as a store for inositol, P, K, Mg, Ca, Fe, and Zn. Key findings of this study were the following: (i) globoids in protein bodies from nine different tissues and (or) organs in dry Arabidopsis thaliana seeds contained P, K, Mg, and Ca, and sometimes traces of Fe and Zn; (ii) globoids contained higher Ca and lower Mg amounts than occur in globoids in seeds of most other plant species; (iii) globoids in comparable tissue and (or) organ regions of seeds were very similar in elemental composition for wild type and all mutant plants.Key words: Arabidopsis, dry seeds, phytate, mineral nutrient mutants, phosphorus, globoids.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.176
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations21
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of BotanySame topicPhytase and its ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207