MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045829271 · doi:10.1080/07060660109506942

Molecular evidence for induction of phenylalanine ammonia-lyase during <i>Puccinia graminis</i> infection and elicitation in wheat

2001· article· en· W2045829271 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Heping Li, Rainer Fischer, Yu‐Cai Liao

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Pathology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant Gene Expression Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElicitorPhenylalanine ammonia-lyaseBiologyGeneChitinMolecular biologyGene expressionWestern blotBiochemistryPhenylalanineAmino acid

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Degenerate primers corresponding to the conserved sequences in phenylalanine ammonia-lyase (PAL) genes cloned from rice and parsley were used to amplify segments of the PAL genes from wheat (Triticum aestivum). More than 76% base sequence identity with the homologous genes confirmed that a 437 base pairs (bp) fragment was derived from the coding region of PAL. Using this fragment as probe, two PAL genes linked in tandem, Wpalt1 and Wpalt2, were isolated from a wheat genomic library. Northern blot and RNA dot blot analyses using a probe for Wpalt1 demonstrated that Wpalt1 expression was organ specific. Wpalt1 expression was high in roots and moderate in stems, but no detectable expression was found in leaves. Infection of leaves with Puccinia graminis f. sp. tritici (Pgt) induced, within 4 to 8 d, a high level of Wpalt1 transcripts in the Pgt resistant near-isogenic Prelude Sr6 line, while a delayed induction was observed in the Pgt susceptible isogenic Prelude sr6 line. In cell suspension cultures, treatment with chitin oligomers or an elicitor derived from P. graminis germ tube walls activated Wpalt1 gene expression. The Pgt-derived elicitor activated PAL expression earlier than did chitin oligomers, whereas chitin oligomers appeared to be more potent inducers of PAL expression than was the Pgt-derived elicitor.

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 score0.211
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations9
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant PathologySame topicPlant Gene Expression AnalysisFrench-language works237,207