MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992956019 · doi:10.1007/s11103-012-9982-2

Functional analysis of splice variant expression of MADS AFFECTING FLOWERING 2 of Arabidopsis thaliana

2012· article· en· W1992956019 on OpenAlexafffund
Sarah Marie Rosloski, Anandita Singh, Sathya Sheela Jali, Sureshkumar Balasubramanian, Detlef Weigel, Vojislava Grbić

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Molecular Biology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Molecular Biology Research
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMax-Planck-Gesellschaft
KeywordsBiologyspliceArabidopsisArabidopsis thalianaMADS-boxGeneGeneticsRepressorAlternative splicingVernalizationGene expressionMutantExon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The MADS-AFFECTING FLOWERING 2 (MAF2) gene of Arabidopsis thaliana has been characterized as a repressor of flowering. The molecular basis of MAF2 gene function and role of alternative MAF2 transcripts in flowering time modulation is not understood. MAF2 splice variant expression was quantified in cold-acclimated plants by quantitative RT-PCR. Cold influenced the abundance of splice variants and prompted a functional study of splice forms. Individual variants were overexpressed in the Col background and were assayed for their ability to delay flowering. Overexpression of MAF2 variants 2 and 4 had limited effect on flowering time. Overexpression of MAF2 splice variant 1 resulted in early flowering and affected the expression of the endogenous MAF2 gene and its paralogues, confounding functional assessment. In the Ll-2 Arabidopsis accession, a MAF2, MAF3, MAF4 and FLC null line, MAF2 var1 was consistent in its effect on reproductive delay under ambient and reduced temperatures, indicating that it acts as a repressor of flowering.

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)0.001
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 score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.267

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.258
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

Citations85
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant Molecular BiologySame topicPlant Molecular Biology ResearchFrench-language works237,207