MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133103877 · doi:10.1104/pp.124.1.253

Isolation of a cDNA Encoding a Granule-Bound 152-Kilodalton Starch-Branching Enzyme in Wheat

2000· article· en· W2133103877 on OpenAlexaff
Monica Båga, Ramesh Nair, Anne Repellin, G. J. Scoles, Ravindra N. Chibbar

Bibliographic record

VenuePLANT PHYSIOLOGY · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFood composition and properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanPlant Biotechnology Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComplementary DNABiologyEndospermPeptide sequencecDNA libraryMolecular biologyBiochemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Screening of a wheat (Triticum aestivum) cDNA library for starch-branching enzyme I (SBEI) genes combined with 5'-rapid amplification of cDNA ends resulted in isolation of a 4,563-bp composite cDNA, Sbe1c. Based on sequence alignment to characterized SBEI cDNA clones isolated from plants, the SBEIc predicted from the cDNA sequence was produced with a transit peptide directing the polypeptide into plastids. Furthermore, the predicted mature form of SBEIc was much larger (152 kD) than previously characterized plant SBEI (80-100 kD) and contained a partial duplication of SBEI sequences. The first SBEI domain showed high amino acid similarity to a 74-kD wheat SBEI-like protein that is inactive as a branching enzyme when expressed in Escherichia coli. The second SBEI domain on SBEIc was identical in sequence to a functional 87-kD SBEI produced in the wheat endosperm. Immunoblot analysis of proteins produced in developing wheat kernels demonstrated that the 152-kD SBEIc was, in contrast to the 87- to 88-kD SBEI, preferentially associated with the starch granules. Proteins similar in size and recognized by wheat SBEI antibodies were also present in Triticum monococcum, Triticum tauschii, and Triticum turgidum subsp. durum.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.203
Threshold uncertainty score0.462

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations49
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLANT PHYSIOLOGYSame topicFood composition and propertiesFrench-language works237,207