MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061503988 · doi:10.1080/07352680701572966

Promotion of Plant Growth by Bacterial ACC Deaminase

2007· article· en· W2061503988 on OpenAlexaff
Bernard R. Glick, Biljana Todorović, Jennifer Czarny, Zhenyu Cheng, Jin Duan, Brendan J. McConkey

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Reviews in Plant Sciences · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLegume Nitrogen Fixing Symbiosis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlant growthBacteriaBiologyBiotechnologyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To date, there has been only limited commercial use of plant growth-promoting bacteria in agriculture, horticulture, and silviculture. However, with recent progress toward understanding the mechanisms that these organisms utilize to facilitate plant growth, the use of plant growth-promoting bacteria is expected to continue to increase worldwide. One of the key mechanisms employed by plant growth-promoting bacteria to facilitate plant growth is the lowering of plant ethylene levels by the enzyme 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate (ACC) deaminase. This article reviews the published work on this enzyme, with an emphasis on its biochemistry, protein structure, genes, and regulation. In addition, this article provides some initial insights into the changes in both plants and ACC deaminase-containing plant growth-promoting bacteria as a consequence of plant-microbe interactions. Finally, a brief discussion of how bacterial ACC deaminase and indoleacetic acid (IAA) together modulate plant growth and development is included.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.001

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.236 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations880
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Reviews in Plant SciencesSame topicLegume Nitrogen Fixing SymbiosisFrench-language works237,207