A comparison of <i>in vivo</i> targeted gene expression during fungal colonization of DED‐susceptible <i>Ulmus americana</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary This study examined in vivo gene expression associated with the colonization of Dutch elm disease‐susceptible Ulmus americana by H175, an aggressive strain of Ophiostoma novo‐ulmi Brasier. Stress‐related genes encoding phenylalanine ammonia‐lyase (PAL), chitinase (CHT) and polygalacturonase inhibiting protein (PGIP) were used to observe gene expression changes during U. americana colonization by H175. A novel non‐invasive method employing leaf midribs was used to observe plant gene expression, fungal colonization and mansonone F accumulation. RNA dot blots determined that all transcripts probed were induced during colonization compared with unchallenged controls. PAL and PGIP expression were increased in leaf midrib tissue prior to fungal colonization, suggesting a remote signal induction. CHT expression was increased locally with the presence of fungus, suggesting a local signal induction. Mansonone F accumulation was detected prior to fungal colonization suggesting a remote signal induction. The in vivo method used will provide a useful tool for in vivo disease research, particularly in trees, where chemically complex tissue can impede RNA isolation and downstream analysis.
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".