MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002265852 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0097949

Chitinase-Like (CTL) and Cellulose Synthase (CESA) Gene Expression in Gelatinous-Type Cellulosic Walls of Flax (Linum usitatissimum L.) Bast Fibers

2014· article· en· W2002265852 on OpenAlexafffund
Natalia Mokshina, Tatyana Gorshkova, Michael K. Deyholos

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPolysaccharides and Plant Cell Walls
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersRussian Foundation for Basic ResearchGenome Canada
KeywordsBast fibreBiologyLinumChitinaseCell wallSecondary cell wallGene familyMiddle lamellaGeneGene expressionXylemCelluloseBotanyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plant chitinases (EC 3.2.1.14) and chitinase-like (CTL) proteins have diverse functions including cell wall biosynthesis and disease resistance. We analyzed the expression of 34 chitinase and chitinase-like genes of flax (collectively referred to as LusCTLs), belonging to glycoside hydrolase family 19 (GH19). Analysis of the transcript expression patterns of LusCTLs in the stem and other tissues identified three transcripts (LusCTL19, LusCTL20, LusCTL21) that were highly enriched in developing bast fibers, which form cellulose-rich gelatinous-type cell walls. The same three genes had low relative expression in tissues with primary cell walls and in xylem, which forms a xylan type of secondary cell wall. Phylogenetic analysis of the LusCTLs identified a flax-specific sub-group that was not represented in any of other genomes queried. To provide further context for the gene expression analysis, we also conducted phylogenetic and expression analysis of the cellulose synthase (CESA) family genes of flax, and found that expression of secondary wall-type LusCESAs (LusCESA4, LusCESA7 and LusCESA8) was correlated with the expression of two LusCTLs (LusCTL1, LusCTL2) that were the most highly enriched in xylem. The expression of LusCTL19, LusCTL20, and LusCTL21 was not correlated with that of any CESA subgroup. These results defined a distinct type of CTLs that may have novel functions specific to the development of the gelatinous (G-type) cellulosic walls.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.165 · 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 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

Citations57
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicPolysaccharides and Plant Cell WallsFrench-language works237,207