MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Identification and Rational Design of Novel Antimicrobial Peptides for Plant Protection

2008· review· en· W2114496961 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Phytopathology · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicAntimicrobial Peptides and Activities
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyRational designAntimicrobial peptidesAntimicrobialComputational biologyIdentification (biology)Mode of actionBiotechnologyPeptideBiochemistryMicrobiologyGeneticsBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Peptides and small proteins exhibiting antimicrobial activity have been isolated from many organisms ranging from insects to humans, including plants. Their role in defense is established, and their use in agriculture was already being proposed shortly after their discovery. However, some natural peptides have undesirable properties that complicate their application. Advances in peptide synthesis and high-throughput activity screening have made possible the de novo and rational design of novel peptides with improved properties. This review summarizes findings in the identification and design of short antimicrobial peptides with activity against plant pathogens, and will discuss alternatives for their heterologous production suited to plant disease control. Recent studies suggest that peptide antimicrobial action is not due solely to microbe permeation as previously described, but that more subtle factors might account for the specificity and absence of toxicity of some peptides. The elucidation of the mode of action and interaction with microbes will assist the improvement of peptide design with a view to targeting specific problems in agriculture and providing new tools for plant protection.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.906
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.304
Teacher spread0.255 · 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