Elements regulating<i>AGAMOUS</i>expression are conserved between<i>Arabidopsis thaliana</i>,<i>Brassica napus</i>, and<i>Linum usitatissimum</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To investigate the functional conservation of cis regulatory elements controlling AGAMOUS (AG) expression, we placed the promoter region of AG from Arabidopsis thaliana into a close relative, Brassica napus, and a distantly related species, Linum usitatissimum, and analyzed the subsequent expression patterns in each species. Spatially, the expression patterns in all three species were marginally similar, in that expression was confined primarily to the reproductive organs and nectarium. Within organs however, tissue-specific expression patterns were not conserved between species. Unlike Arabidopsis, the transgenic AG cis elements did not express in the ovules of B. napus and L. usitatissimum. Temporally, the pattern of AG cis-element expression in B. napus was identical to that of Arabidopsis during early development; however, the AG cis elements did not express at all during early flower development in L. usitatissimum. These results suggest that although regulatory factors controlling the generalized local expression of AG have been conserved between these species, those controlling temporal and tissue-specific expression have not.Key words: AGAMOUS, cis elements, regulation, Arabidopsis, Brassica napus, Linum usitatissimum.
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 | 0.001 |
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.
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".