Arginase Induction Represses Gall Development During Clubroot Infection in Arabidopsis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Arginase induction can play a defensive role through the reduction of arginine availability for phytophageous insects. Arginase activity is also induced during gall growth caused by Plasmodiophora brassicae infection in roots of Arabidopsis thaliana; however, its possible role in this context has been unclear. We report here that the mutation of the arginase-encoding gene ARGAH2 abrogates clubroot-induced arginase activity and results in enhanced gall size in infected roots, suggesting that arginase plays a defensive role. Induction of arginase activity in infected roots was impaired in the jar1 mutant, highlighting a link between the arginase response to clubroot and jasmonate signaling. Clubroot-induced accumulation of the principal amino acids in galls was not affected by the argah2 mutation. Because ARGAH2 was previously reported to control auxin response, we investigated the role of ARGAH2 in callus induction. ARGAH2 was found to be highly induced in auxin/cytokinin-triggered aseptic plant calli, and callus development was enhanced in argah2 in the absence of the pathogen. We hypothesized that arginase contributes to a negative control over clubroot symptoms, by reducing hormone-triggered cellular proliferation.
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) | 0.001 | 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".