MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Two virulence determinants of type III effector AvrPto are functionally conserved in diverse <i>Pseudomonas syringae</i> pathovars

2010· article· en· W2076082532 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Hanh Nguyen, Inhwa Yeam, Aurélie Angot, Gregory B. Martin

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Phytologist · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Pathogenic Bacteria Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of TorontoU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsPseudomonas syringaeVirulenceEffectorBiologyMicrobiologyType (biology)PseudomonasGeneticsPathogenBacteriaCell biologyGeneEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

*The Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato type III effector protein AvrPto has two functional domains that contribute additively to its ability to promote pathogen virulence in susceptible tomato plants and also defense responses in resistant tomato and tobacco genotypes. Here, we test the hypothesis that key amino acid residues in these two domains will be conserved even in sequence-divergent AvrPto proteins expressed by diverse P. syringae pathovars. *We cloned avrPto homologs from diverse P. syringae pathovars and characterized the four most diverse homologs from P. syringae pathovars mori, lachrymans, myricae and oryzae for their virulence activity and ability to elicit resistance in tomato and tobacco. *Key residues within the two AvrPto domains are conserved in three of the four homologs and are required for virulence activity and defense elicitation. AvrPto(oryzae), lacks conserved residues in each domain, but was found to be recognized by a previously unknown resistance gene in both tomato and tobacco. *Our results indicate that the two virulence domains of AvrPto are conserved in diverse pathovars despite the fact these domains are recognized by certain plant species. AvrPto may therefore function in pathovars infecting diverse plant species by targeting conserved host processes.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.588
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations18
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew PhytologistSame topicPlant Pathogenic Bacteria StudiesFrench-language works237,207