Pyrimidine deoxyribonucleotide metabolism during maturation and germination of white spruce (<i>Picea glauca</i>) somatic embryos: metabolic fate of C‐labelled cytidine, deoxycytidine and thymidine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pyrimidine deoxyribonucleotide metabolism was investigated during maturation and germination of white spruce somatic embryos by following the metabolic fate of [2‐14C]cytidine, [2‐14C]deoxycytidine and [2‐14C]thymidine. The de‐novo pathway of deoxyribonucleotides was estimated indirectly, by the ability of the tissue to incorporate cytidine into DNA after conversion to dCTP. The salvage pathway was estimated by the utilization of labelled cytidine, deoxycytidine and thymidine for synthesis of deoxyribonucleotides and nucleic acids. Utilization of cytidine for DNA synthesis, via the de novo pathway, was always lower than that observed for RNA throughout the course of the experiment. Incorporation of cytidine into RNA was found to occur either directly, after conversion to CTP, mediated by the enzymes cytidine kinase, nucleoside monophosphate kinase and nucleoside diphosphate kinase, or indirectly, after conversion to UTP via uridine and UMP. Active incorporation of uridine into RNA of white spruce‐cultured cells was demonstrated previously. Salvage of deoxycytidine and thymidine was operative in maturing and germinating white spruce somatic embryos, as label from both compounds was recovered in nucleotides and DNA. However, the utilization of these precursors by the cells was different. Salvage of deoxycytidine was always higher than that observed for thymidine, which was extensively catabolized to CO2 at all stages of embryo development.
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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".