Developmental characterization of the<i>fasciated</i>locus and mapping of<i>Arabidopsis</i>candidate genes involved in the control of floral meristem size and carpel number in tomato
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mutation at the fasciated locus was a key step in the production of extreme fruit size during tomato domestication. To shed light on the nature of these changes, near-isogenic lines were used for a comparative developmental study of fasciated and wild-type tomato plants. The fasciated gene directly affects floral meristem size and is expressed before the earliest stages of flower organogenesis. As a result, mature fruit of fasciated mutants have more carpels (locules) and greater fruit diameter and mass. The discovery that fasciated affects floral meristem size led to a search for candidate genes from Arabidopsis known to be involved in floral meristem development. Putative homologs were identified in a large tomato EST database, verified through phylogenetic analyses, and mapped in tomato; none mapped to the fasciated locus; however, putative homologs of WUS and WIG mapped to the locule number locus on chromosome 2, the second major transition to large tomato fruit, with WUS showing the highest association. In other cases, minor QTLs for floral organ number (lcn2.2) and (stn11.2) co-localized with a CLV1 paralog and with the syntenic region containing the CLV3 gene in Arabidopsis, respectively.
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".