Asymmetric Auxin Response Precedes Asymmetric Growth and Differentiation of <i>asymmetric leaf1</i> and <i>asymmetric leaf2</i> Arabidopsis Leaves
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have analyzed the development of leaf shape and vascular pattern in leaves mutant for ASYMMETRIC LEAVES1 (AS1) or AS2 and compared the timing of developmental landmarks to cellular response to auxin, as measured by expression of the DR5:beta-glucuronidase (GUS) transgene and to cell division, as measured by expression of the cycB1:GUS transgene. We found that the earliest visible defect in both as1 and as2 first leaves is the asymmetric placement of auxin response at the distal leaf tip. This precedes visible changes in leaf morphology, asymmetric placement of the distal margin gap, formation of margin gaps along the leaf border, asymmetric distribution of marginal auxin, and asymmetry in cell division patterns. Moreover, treatment of developing leaves with either exogenous auxin or an auxin transport inhibitor eliminates asymmetric auxin response and subsequent asymmetric leaf development. We propose that the initial asymmetric placement of auxin at the leaf tip gives rise to later asymmetries in the internal auxin sources, which subsequently result in asymmetrical cell differentiation and division patterns.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".