MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029382769 · doi:10.1042/bj20091147

Breaking the code: Ca2+ sensors in plant signalling

2009· review· en· W2029382769 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas A. DeFalco, Kyle W. Bender, Wayne A. Snedden

Bibliographic record

VenueBiochemical Journal · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Stress Responses and Tolerance
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSecond messenger systemBiologySignallingFunction (biology)Functional diversityIon channelCell biologyKinaseSignal transductionComputational biologyBiochemistryReceptorEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ca2+ ions play a vital role as second messengers in plant cells during various developmental processes and in response to environmental stimuli. Plants have evolved a diversity of unique proteins that bind Ca2+ using the evolutionarily conserved EF-hand motif. The currently held hypothesis is that these proteins function as Ca2+ sensors by undergoing conformational changes in response to Ca2+-binding that facilitate their regulation of target proteins and thereby co-ordinate various signalling pathways. The three main classes of these EF-hand Ca2+sensors in plants are CaMs [calmodulins; including CMLs (CaM-like proteins)], CDPKs (calcium-dependent protein kinases) and CBLs (calcineurin B-like proteins). In the plant species examined to date, each of these classes is represented by a large family of proteins, most of which have not been characterized biochemically and whose physiological roles remain unclear. In the present review, we discuss recent advances in research on CaMs and CMLs, CDPKs and CBLs, and we attempt to integrate the current knowledge on the different sensor classes into common physiological themes.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.228 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations529
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiochemical JournalSame topicPlant Stress Responses and ToleranceFrench-language works237,207