CSR1, the Sole Target of Imidazolinone Herbicide in Arabidopsis thaliana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The imidazolinone-tolerant mutant of Arabidopsis thaliana, csr1-2(D), carries a mutation equivalent to that found in commercially available Clearfield crops. Despite their widespread usage, the mechanism by which Clearfield crops gain imidazolinone herbicide tolerance has not yet been fully characterized. Transcription profiling of imazapyr (an imidazolinone herbicide)-treated wild-type and csr1-2(D) mutant plants using Affymetrix ATH1 GeneChip microarrays was performed to elucidate further the biochemical and genetic mechanisms of imidazolinone resistance. In wild-type shoots, the genes which responded earliest to imazapyr treatment were detoxification-related genes which have also been shown to be induced by other abiotic stresses. Early-response genes included steroid sulfotransferase (ST) and 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylic acid oxidase (ACO), as well as members of the glycosyltransferase, glutathione transferase (GST), cytochrome P450, ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transporter, multidrug and toxin extrusion (MATE) and alternative oxidase (AOX) protein families. Later stages of the imazapyr response involved regulation of genes participating in biosynthesis of amino acids, secondary metabolites and tRNA. In contrast to the dynamic changes in the transcriptome profile observed in imazapyr-treated wild-type plants, the transcriptome of csr1-2(D) did not exhibit significant changes following imazapyr treatment, compared with mock-treated csr1-2(D). Further, no substantial difference was observed between wild-type and csr1-2(D) transcriptomes in the absence of imazapyr treatment. These results indicate that CSR1 is the sole target of imidazolinone and that the csr1-2(D) mutation has little or no detrimental effect on whole-plant fitness.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".