Changes in actin microfilament arrays in developing pea root nodule cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Various microorganisms that form symbiotic associations with plant roots alter the cytoskeleton of host cells. The objective of this study was to determine the organization of actin microfilaments in developing Pisum sativum L. (pea) root nodule cells at various stages after infection by Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. viciae. Fluorescently labelled microfilaments in uninfected pea root nodule cells occur in association with the nucleus, along cytoplasmic strands, and as long microfilament bundles randomly organized in the cortex of the cell. These actin arrays are also present in recently infected cells that have been invaded by an infection thread and contain a small number of bacteroids. In addition, the recently infected cells contain diffuse cytoplasmic actin, long actin microfilament bundles near the vacuole, and a nuclear-associated network of microfilament bundles. In older infected cells, the predominant array is a network of cytoplasmic microfilaments that are wavy and extend in multiple directions within the cell; the network is equally abundant in all regions of the cytoplasm and may interact with the bacteroids and organelles. Thus, actin microfilaments reorganize during the pea root nodule infection process to form distinct arrays whose organization depends on the stage of infection.Key words: nodule, actin microfilaments, Rhizobium, pea, symbiosis.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".