Opium poppy: a model system to investigate alkaloid biosynthesis in plants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Remarkable progress on the biology of plant secondary metabolism has recently been realized. The application of advanced biochemistry, molecular, cellular, and genomic methodologies has revealed biological paradigms unique to the biosynthesis of secondary metabolites, including alkaloids, flavonoids, glucosinolates, phenylpropanoids, and terpenoids. The use of model plant systems has facilitated integrative research on the biosynthesis and regulation of each group of natural products. The model legume, Medicago truncatula Gaertn., plays a key role in studies on phenylpropanoid and flavonoid metabolism. Mint ( Mentha × piperita L.) and various conifers are the systems of choice to investigate terpenoid metabolism, whereas members of the mustard family (Brassica spp.) are central to work on glucosinolate pathways. Arabidopsis thaliana (L.) Heynh. is also used to study the biosynthesis of most secondary compounds, except alkaloids. Unlike other categories of secondary metabolites, the many structural types of alkaloids are biosynthetically unrelated. The biology of each group is unique, although common paradigms are also apparent. Opium poppy ( Papaver somniferum L.) produces a large number of benzylisoquinoline alkaloids and has begun to challenge Madigascar periwinkle ( Catharanthus roseus (L.) G. Don), which accumulates monoterpenoid indole alkaloids, as the most versatile model system to study alkaloid metabolism. An overview of recent progress on the biology of plant alkaloid biosynthesis, with a focus on benzylisoquinoline alkaloid pathways in opium poppy and related species, highlights the emergence of opium poppy as an important model system to investigate secondary metabolism.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".