MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131965449 · doi:10.4161/psb.4.3.8032

NO contributes to cadmium toxicity in<i>Arabidopsis thaliana</i>by mediating an iron deprivation response

2009· letter· en· W2131965449 on OpenAlexaff
Angélique Besson‐Bard, David Wendehenne

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Signaling & Behavior · 2009
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Micronutrient Interactions and Effects
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nautical Research Society
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyArabidopsis thalianaArabidopsisCadmiumCell biologyTransporterMediatorNitric oxideEndogenyToxicityBiochemistryMutantGeneChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several studies have revealed that nitric oxide (NO), an endogenous mediator in diverse physiological processes, is produced in plants exposed to the toxic metal cadmium (Cd). It was first shown that exogenously applied NO protects plant tissues against the oxidative damages triggered by Cd, suggesting a putative role for NO in counteracting the deleterious effects of Cd. More recently, our team as well as other laboratories challenged this view and demonstrated that endogenously produced NO promotes the metal-induced reduction of root growth. We investigated more thoroughly the role of NO in mediating Cd effects in roots. We have shown that in Arabidopsis thaliana, the Cd-mediated NO production is sensitive to mammalian NO synthase inhibitors and occurs downstream of IRT1, a major iron transporter also involved in the uptake of Cd. Our data support a model in which this production might be related to the iron deprivation caused by Cd. Accordingly, we found that NO up-regulates the expression of genes encoding proteins related to iron acquisition, including IRT1. This process might explain the ability of NO to amplify Cd uptake and, consequently, the toxic effects of the metal.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.605
Threshold uncertainty score0.887

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.220 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations16
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant Signaling & BehaviorSame topicPlant Micronutrient Interactions and EffectsFrench-language works237,207