The Molecular Cloning of Artemisinic Aldehyde Δ11(13) Reductase and Its Role in Glandular Trichome-dependent Biosynthesis of Artemisinin in Artemisia annua
Bibliographic record
Abstract
At some point during biosynthesis of the antimalarial artemisinin in glandular trichomes of Artemisia annua, the Delta11(13) double bond originating in amorpha-4,11-diene is reduced. This is thought to occur in artemisinic aldehyde, but other intermediates have been suggested. In an effort to understand double bond reduction in artemisinin biosynthesis, extracts of A. annua flower buds were investigated and found to contain artemisinic aldehyde Delta11(13) double bond reductase activity. Through a combination of partial protein purification, mass spectrometry, and expressed sequence tag analysis, a cDNA clone corresponding to the enzyme was isolated. The corresponding gene Dbr2, encoding a member of the enoate reductase family with similarity to plant 12-oxophytodienoate reductases, was found to be highly expressed in glandular trichomes. Recombinant Dbr2 was subsequently characterized and shown to be relatively specific for artemisinic aldehyde and to have some activity on small alpha,beta-unsaturated carbonyl compounds. Expression in yeast of Dbr2 and genes encoding four other enzymes in the artemisinin pathway resulted in the accumulation of dihydroartemsinic acid. The relevance of Dbr2 to trichome-specific artemisinin biosynthesis is discussed.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".