MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Three polyphenol oxidases from hybrid poplar are differentially expressed during development and after wounding and elicitor treatment

2004· article· en· W2133557562 on OpenAlexafffund
Jiehua Wang, C. Peter Constabel

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysiologia Plantarum · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPostharvest Quality and Shelf Life Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsMethyl jasmonateElicitorPolyphenol oxidaseBiologyPopulus trichocarpaGeneGene expressionOxidase testBiochemistryBotanyEnzymePeroxidase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The expression of three polyphenol oxidase (PPO; EC 1.10.3.1) genes was investigated in hybrid poplar (Populus trichocarpa × P. deltoides). PtdPPO1 was previously isolated as a wound‐ and herbivore‐inducible PPO (Constabel et al. Plant Physiol 124: 285–295, 2000), whereas PtdPPO2 and PtdPPO3 are two novel hybrid poplar PPO genes isolated from stem and root tissue, respectively. Sequence analysis revealed that the three PPOs were 60–66% identical at the amino acid level. Using gene‐specific probes, the expression patterns of the three PPOs was investigated in various organs at different developmental stages. Under normal growing conditions, PtdPPO1 mRNA was absent from all organs tested, while PtdPPO2 was found to be expressed in mid‐veins, petioles, stems and roots. PtdPPO3 was expressed only in roots. PtdPPO1 and PtdPPO2 were induced by mechanical wounding and methyl jasmonate, but in different tissues. Overall, the expression patterns suggest that the three PPO genes may have specialized physiological functions in hybrid poplar.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations27
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysiologia PlantarumSame topicPostharvest Quality and Shelf Life ManagementFrench-language works237,207