MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087636065 · doi:10.1055/s-2004-830383

Gene Expression during Formation of Earlywood and Latewood in Loblolly Pine: Expression Profiles of 350 Genes

2004· article· en· W2087636065 on OpenAlexaff
Ulrika Egertsdotter, L. M. van Zyl, John Mackay, G. F. Peter, Mariana E. Kirst, C.J. Clark, Ross Whetten, Ronald R. Sederoff

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Biology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBiologyLoblolly pineGeneGene expressionBotanyGeneticsPinus <genus>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The natural variability of wood formation in trees affords opportunities to correlate transcript profiles with the resulting wood properties. We have used cDNA microarrays to study transcript abundance in developing secondary xylem of loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) over a growing season. The cDNAs were selected from a collection of 75 000 ESTs that have been sequenced and annotated (http://web.ahc.umn.edu/biodata/nsfpine/). Cell wall thickness and climatic data were related to earlywood and latewood formation at different time points during the growing season. Seventy-one ESTs showed preferential expression in earlywood or latewood, including 23 genes with no significant similarity to genes in GenBank. Seven genes involved in lignin synthesis were preferentially expressed in latewood. The studies have provided initial insights into the variation of expression patterns of some of the genes related to the wood formation process.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 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

Citations50
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant BiologySame topicForest ecology and managementFrench-language works237,207