The Arabidopsis BRAHMA Chromatin-Remodeling ATPase Is Involved in Repression of Seed Maturation Genes in Leaves
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Synthesis and accumulation of seed storage proteins (SSPs) is an important aspect of the seed maturation program. Genes encoding SSPs are specifically and highly expressed in the seed during maturation. However, the mechanisms that repress the expression of these genes in leaf tissue are not well understood. To gain insight into the repression mechanisms, we performed a genetic screen for mutants that express SSPs in leaves. Here, we show that mutations affecting BRAHMA (BRM), a SNF2 chromatin-remodeling ATPase, cause ectopic expression of a subset of SSPs and other embryogenesis-related genes in leaf tissue. Consistent with the notion that such SNF2-like ATPases form protein complexes in vivo, we observed similar phenotypes for mutations of AtSWI3C, a BRM-interacting partner, and BSH, a SNF5 homolog and essential SWI/SNF subunit. Chromatin immunoprecipitation experiments show that BRM is recruited to the promoters of a number of embryogenesis genes in wild-type leaves, including the 2S genes, expressed in brm leaves. Consistent with its role in nucleosome remodeling, BRM appears to affect the chromatin structure of the At2S2 promoter. Thus, the BRM-containing chromatin-remodeling ATPase complex involved in many aspects of plant development mediates the repression of SSPs in leaf tissue.
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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".