MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058361066 · doi:10.4161/psb.4.2.7479

MADS about MOSS

2009· letter· en· W2058361066 on OpenAlexaff
Stacy D. Singer, Neil W. Ashton

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Signaling & Behavior · 2009
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Molecular Biology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyGeneMossPhyscomitrella patensPlant evolutionEvolutionary biologyPhylogenetic treeMADS-boxGeneticsArabidopsisEcologyGenome

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Classic MIKC-type MADS-box genes (MIKC(c)) play diverse and crucial roles in angiosperm development, the most studied and best understood of which is the specification of floral organ identities. To shed light on how the flower evolved, phylogenetic and functional analyses of genes involved in its ontogeny, such as the MIKC(c) genes, must be undertaken in as broad a selection as possible of plants with disparate ancestries. Since little is known about the functions of these genes in non-seed plants, we investigated the developmental roles of a subset of the MIKC(c) genes present in the moss, Physcomitrella patens, which is positioned informatively near the base of the land plant evolutionary tree. We observed that transgenic lines possessing an antisense copy of a MIKC(c) gene characteristically displayed knocked-down expression of the corresponding native MIKC(c) gene as well as multiple diverse phenotypic alterations to the haploid gametophytic and diploid sporophytic generations of the life cycle. In this addendum, we re-examine our findings in the light of recent pertinent literature and provide additional data concerning the effects of simultaneously knocking out multiple MIKC(c) genes in this moss.

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)0.002
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.008

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.220 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations6
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant Signaling & BehaviorSame topicPlant Molecular Biology ResearchFrench-language works237,207