MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Global monitoring of autumn gene expression within and among phenotypically divergent populations of Sitka spruce (<i>Picea sitchensis</i>)

2008· article· en· W2108355695 on OpenAlexaff
Jason A. Holliday, Steven Ralph, Richard White, Jörg Bohlmann, Sally N. Aitken

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Phytologist · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Molecular Biology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyGeneBotanyGene expressionGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cold acclimation in conifers is a complex process, the timing and extent of which reflects local adaptation and varies widely along latitudinal gradients for many temperate and boreal tree species. Despite their ecological and economic importance, little is known about the global changes in gene expression that accompany autumn cold acclimation in conifers. Using three populations of Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis) spanning the species range, and a Picea cDNA microarray with 21,840 unique elements, within- and among-population gene expression was monitored during the autumn. Microarray data were validated for selected genes using real-time PCR. Similar numbers of genes were significantly twofold upregulated (1257) and downregulated (967) between late summer and early winter. Among those upregulated were dehydrins, pathogenesis-related/antifreeze genes, carbohydrate and lipid metabolism genes, and genes involved in signal transduction and transcriptional regulation. Among-population microarray hybridizations at early and late autumn time points revealed substantial variation in the autumn transcriptome, some of which may reflect local adaptation. These results demonstrate the complexity of cold acclimation in conifers, highlight similarities and differences to cold tolerance in annual plants, and provide a solid foundation for functional and genetic studies of this important adaptive 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 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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.284
Threshold uncertainty score0.210

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations117
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew PhytologistSame topicPlant Molecular Biology ResearchFrench-language works237,207