MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131547186 · doi:10.1104/pp.010696

Functional Analysis of Tomato <i>Pti4</i> in Arabidopsis,

2002· article· en· W2131547186 on OpenAlexaff
Keqiang Wu, Lining Tian, Jamie Hollingworth, Daniel C. Brown, Brian Miki

Bibliographic record

VenuePLANT PHYSIOLOGY · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Molecular Biology Research
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArabidopsisPseudomonas syringaeLycopersiconCauliflower mosaic virusBiologyGenetically modified tomatoTransgeneGenePromoterGenetically modified cropsGeneticsReporter geneGene expressionMADS-boxTranscription factorActivator (genetics)BotanyMutant

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pti4 is a tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) transcription factor that belongs to the ERF (ethylene-responsive element binding factor) family of proteins. It interacts with the Pto kinase in tomato, which confers resistance to the Pseudomonas syringae pv tomato pathogen that causes bacterial speck disease. To study the function of Pti4, transgenic Arabidopsis plants were generated that expressed tomato Pti4 driven by the strong constitutive promoters, cauliflower mosaic virus 35S and tCUP. Global gene expression analysis by Affimetric GeneChip indicated that expression of Pti4 in transgenic Arabidopsis plants induced the expression of GCC box-containing PR genes. We also demonstrated that Pti4 enhanced GCC box-mediated transcription of a reporter gene. The data suggests that tomato Pti4 could act as a transcriptional activator to regulate expression of GCC box-containing genes. Furthermore, we show that the expression of tomato Pti4 in transgenic Arabidopsis plants produced a phenotype similar to that seen in plants treated with ethylene, thus providing evidence that the Pti4 gene is involved in the regulation of a subset of ethylene-responsive genes containing the GCC box.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.191 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations90
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLANT PHYSIOLOGYSame topicPlant Molecular Biology ResearchFrench-language works237,207