Wheat cultivar‐specific proteins in grain revealed by 2‐DE and their application to cultivar identification of flour
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wheat flour proteins were studied to identify the cultivar-specific proteins and use them to identify cultivars in flours. Proteins extracted from flours of Japanese wheat (cultivars Hokushin, Horoshirikomugi, Kitanokaori and Kachikei 33) and Canadian wheat (Canada Western Red Spring Wheat No. 1; 1CW) were analyzed by 2-DE with IEF gels over three pH ranges: pH 4-7, pH 5-8, and pH 6-11. This system enabled detection of more than 1600 protein spots. We recognized that among 50 protein spots showing cultivar-dependent qualitative changes, 25 proteins were wheat cultivar specific. These 50 protein spots were analyzed by N-terminal Edman degradation microsequencing and MALDI-TOF-MS; 21 protein spots were storage proteins, such as gliadin and low-molecular mass glutenin subunit. Five protein spots were identified as dehydroascorbate reductase (Triticum aestivum), triticin precursor (T. aestivum), alpha-amylase inhibitor (Oryza sativa), DNA-binding with one finger (Dof) zinc family protein (O. sativa), and nonphototropic hypocotyl 1 (NPH1) protein (Avena sativa). The other protein spots appeared to be hypothetical proteins (O. sativa or Arabidopsis thaliana) or functional unknown proteins. These specific proteins can be used as markers to identify wheat cultivars in blended flour composed of two or three flours.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it