MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026976547 · doi:10.1002/pmic.200900670

Inhibition of photosynthesis and modification of the wheat leaf proteome by Ptr ToxB: A host‐specific toxin from the fungal pathogen <i>Pyrenophora tritici‐repentis</i>

2010· article· en· W2026976547 on OpenAlexaff
Yong Min Kim, Noureddine Bouras, Nat N. V. Kav, Stephen E. Strelkov

Bibliographic record

VenuePROTEOMICS · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Stress Responses and Tolerance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChlorosisPyrenophoraPhotosynthesisToxinBiologyProteomeBotanyMicrobiologyBiochemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tan spot, caused by Pyrenophora tritici-repentis, is an important foliar disease of wheat. The fungus produces the host-specific, chlorosis-inducing toxin Ptr ToxB. To better understand toxin action, we examined the effects of Ptr ToxB on sensitive wheat. Photosynthesis, as measured by infrared gas analysis, declined significantly within 12 h of toxin treatment, prior to the development of chlorosis at 48-72 h. Analysis by 2-DE revealed a total of 102 protein spots with significantly altered intensities 12-36 h after toxin treatment, of which 66 were more abundant and 36 were less abundant than in the buffer-treated control. The identities of 47 of these spots were established by MS/MS, and included proteins involved in the light reactions of photosynthesis, the Calvin cycle, and the stress/defense response. Based on the declines in photosynthesis and the identities of the differentially abundant proteins, we hypothesize that Ptr ToxB causes a rapid disruption in the photosynthetic processes of sensitive wheat, leading to the generation of ROS and oxidative stress. Although the photoprotective and repair mechanisms of the host appear to initially still be functional, they are probably overwhelmed by the continued production of ROS, leading to chlorophyll photooxidation and the development of chlorosis.

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)0.000
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 score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.162

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.179 · 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

Citations40
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePROTEOMICSSame topicPlant Stress Responses and ToleranceFrench-language works237,207