Global Transcriptome Analysis of Constitutive Resistance to the White Pine Weevil in Spruce
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Constitutive defense mechanisms are critical to the understanding of defense mechanisms in conifers because they constitute the first barrier to attacks by insect pests. In interior spruce, trees that are putatively resistant and susceptible to attacks by white pine weevil (Pissodes strobi) typically exhibit constitutive differences in traits such as resin duct size and number, bark thickness, and terpene content. To improve our knowledge of their genetic basis, we compared globally the constitutive expression levels of 17,825 genes between 20 putatively resistant and 20 putatively susceptible interior spruce trees from the British Columbia tree improvement program. We identified 54 upregulated and 137 downregulated genes in resistant phenotypes, relative to susceptible phenotypes, with a maximum fold change of 2.24 and 3.91, respectively. We found a puzzling increase of resistance by downregulated genes, as one would think that "procuring armaments" is the best defense. Also, although terpenes and phenolic compounds play an important role in conifer defense, we found few of these genes to be differentially expressed. We found 15 putative small heat-shock proteins (sHSP) and several other stress-related proteins to be downregulated in resistant trees. Downregulated putative sHSP belong to several sHSP classes and represented 58% of all tested putative sHSP. These proteins are well known to be involved in plant response to various kinds of abiotic stress; however, their role in constitutive resistance is not yet understood. The lack of correspondence between transcriptome profile clusters and phenotype classifications suggests that weevil resistance in spruce is a complex trait.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".