The Tomato Transcription Factor Pti4 Regulates Defense-Related Gene Expression via GCC Box and Non-GCC Box<i>cis</i>Elements[W]
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The tomato transcription factor Pti4, an ethylene-responsive factor (ERF), interacts physically with the disease resistance protein Pto and binds the GCC box cis element that is present in the promoters of many pathogenesis-related (PR) genes. We reported previously that Arabidopsis plants expressing Pti4 constitutively express several GCC box-containing PR genes and show reduced disease symptoms compared with wild-type plants after inoculation with Pseudomonas syringae pv tomato or Erysiphe orontii. To gain insight into how genome-wide gene expression is affected by Pti4, we used serial analysis of gene expression (SAGE) to compare transcripts in wild-type and Pti4-expressing Arabidopsis plants. SAGE provided quantitative measurements of >20,000 transcripts and identified the 50 most highly expressed genes in Arabidopsis vegetative tissues. Comparison of the profiles from wild-type and Pti4-expressing Arabidopsis plants revealed 78 differentially abundant transcripts encoding defense-related proteins, protein kinases, ribosomal proteins, transporters, and two transcription factors (TFs). Many of the genes identified were expressed differentially in wild-type Arabidopsis during infection by Pseudomonas syringae pv tomato, supporting a role for them in defense-related processes. Unexpectedly, the promoters of most Pti4-regulated genes did not have a GCC box. Chromatin immunoprecipitation experiments confirmed that Pti4 binds in vivo to promoters lacking this cis element. Potential binding sites for ERF, MYB, and GBF TFs were present in statistically significantly increased numbers in promoters regulated by Pti4. Thus, Pti4 appears to regulate gene expression directly by binding the GCC box and possibly a non-GCC box element and indirectly by either activating the expression of TF genes or interacting physically with other TFs.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".