MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055008532 · doi:10.1074/jbc.m102971200

Identification of a Δ4 Fatty Acid Desaturase fromThraustochytrium sp. Involved in the Biosynthesis of Docosahexanoic Acid by Heterologous Expression inSaccharomyces cerevisiae and Brassica juncea

2001· article· en· W2055008532 on OpenAlexaff
Xiao Qiu, Haiping Hong, S. L. MacKenzie

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biological Chemistry · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicLipid metabolism and biosynthesis
Canadian institutionsPlant Biotechnology InstituteAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrassicaHeterologousHeterologous expressionBiosynthesisBiochemistryBiologyFatty acidFatty acid desaturaseGeneBotanyPolyunsaturated fatty acid

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The existence of Delta 4 fatty acid desaturation in the biosynthesis of docosahexanoic acid (DHA) has been questioned over the years. In this report we describe the identification from Thraustochytrium sp. of two cDNAs, Fad4 and Fad5, coding for Delta 4 and Delta 5 fatty acid desaturases, respectively. The Delta 4 desaturase, when expressed in Saccharomyces cerevisiae, introduced a double bond at position 4 of 22:5(n-3) and 22:4(n-6) resulting in the production of DHA and docosapentanoic acid. The enzyme, when expressed in Brassica juncea under the control of a constitutive promoter, desaturated the exogenously supplied substrate 22:5(n-3), resulting in the production of DHA in vegetative tissues. These results support the notion that DHA can be synthesized via Delta 4 desaturation and suggest the possibility that DHA can be produced in oilseed crops on a large scale.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 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

Citations234
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biological ChemistrySame topicLipid metabolism and biosynthesisFrench-language works237,207