Development-Dependent Expression of DNA Repair Genes and Epigenetic Regulators in Arabidopsis Plants Exposed to Ionizing Radiation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Both plant senescence and plant response to ionizing radiation involve changes in gene expression and epigenetic profiles, that rely on the formation of reactive oxygen species. However, how the developmental stage of a plant affects its response to ionizing radiation has not been extensively studied. In this study, our experiments showed that exposure to low (10 Gy) and high (100 Gy) doses of ionizing radiation causes developmental delays in plants that may result in reduced biomass or even death of the organism. In particular, 20-day-old plants, which are in the process of transitioning to reproductive growth, showed a distinct response to irradiation compared to 10- or 30-day-old irradiated plants that affects the expression of DNA repair genes. Specifically, we found that the expression of mismatch repair genes was increased in 20-day-old plants, while RAD51 was increased in 10- and 30-day-old plants. Furthermore, we found increased expression of MET1, CMT3 and SUVH5 epigenetic regulators that paralleled decreased ONSEN transcript levels in 20-day-old irradiated plants. These findings suggest that plants exposed during early reproductive growth exhibit a tighter control over genome stability in response to ionizing irradiation compared to plants irradiated at other developmental stages.
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 | 0.000 |
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 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".