MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001847097 · doi:10.4161/psb.4.2.7688

Role of lignification in plant defense

2009· letter· en· W2001847097 on OpenAlexaff
Nazmul H. Bhuiyan, Gopalan Selvaraj, Yangdou Wei, John King

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Signaling & Behavior · 2009
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant Gene Expression Analysis
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaPlant Biotechnology InstituteUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyMonolignolBlumeria graminisPowdery mildewGene silencingPathogenHaustoriumGenePlant disease resistanceRNA interferencePlant defense against herbivoryBotanyGeneticsHost (biology)BiosynthesisRNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For a long time it has been believed that lignification has an important role in host defense against pathogen invasion. Recently, by using an RNAi gene-silencing assay we showed that monolignol biosynthesis plays a critical role in cell wall apposition (CWA)-mediated defense against powdery mildew fungus penetration into diploid wheat. Silencing monolignol genes led to super-susceptibility of wheat leaf tissues to an appropriate pathogen, Blumeria graminis f. sp. tritici (Bgt), and compromised penetration resistance to a non-appropriate pathogen, B. graminis f. sp. hordei. Autofluorescence of CWA regions was reduced significantly at the fungal penetration sites in silenced cells. Our work indicates an important role for monolignol biosynthetic genes in effective CWA formation against pathogen penetration. In this addendum, we show that silencing of monolignol genes also compromised penetration resistant to Bgt in a resistant wheat line. In addition, we discuss possible insights into how lignin biosynthesis contributes to host defense.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0060.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations315
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant Signaling & BehaviorSame topicPlant Gene Expression AnalysisFrench-language works237,207