MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2007605380 · doi:10.1139/gen-2013-0177

Regulatory motifs identified from a maize developmental coexpression network

2014· article· en· W2007605380 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Gregory S. Downs, Christophe Liseron-Monfils, Lewis Lukens

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Molecular Biology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyTranscriptomeGeneGeneticsComputational biologyGene regulatory networkGene expression profilingRegulatory sequenceSequence motifGene expressionRegulation of gene expressionCis-regulatory moduleRegulator genePromoter

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transcriptional control is an important determinant of plant development, and distinct modules of coordinated genes characterize the maize developmental transcriptome. Upstream regulatory sequences are often the primary factors that control gene expression pattern and abundance. Here, we identify 244 regulatory motifs that are significantly enriched within 24 gene expression modules previously constructed from transcript abundances of 34,876 Zea mays (maize) gene models from embryogenesis to senescence. Within modules, we identify motifs that have not been characterized. In addition, we identify motifs similar to experimentally verified motifs, and the functions of these motifs overlap with predicted module functions. This work demonstrates the power of transcript-level coexpression modules to identify both variants of known regulatory motifs and novel motifs that control a species' developmental transcriptome.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
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
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenome→Same topicPlant Molecular Biology Research→French-language works237,207→