A comparison of the <i>Thlaspi caerulescens</i> and <i>Thlaspi arvense</i> shoot transcriptomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Whole-genome transcriptome profiling is revealing how biological systems are regulated at the transcriptional level. This study reports the development of a robust method to profile and compare the transcriptomes of two nonmodel plant species, Thlaspi caerulescens, a zinc (Zn) hyperaccumulator, and Thlaspi arvense, a nonhyperaccumulator, using Affymetrix Arabidopsis thaliana ATH1-121501 GeneChip arrays (Affymetrix, Santa Clara, CA, USA). Transcript abundance was quantified in the shoots of agar- and compost-grown plants of both species. Analyses were optimized using a genomic DNA (gDNA)-based probe-selection strategy based on the hybridization efficiency of Thlaspi gDNA with corresponding A. thaliana probes. In silico alignments of GeneChip probes with Thlaspi gene sequences, and quantitative real-time PCR, confirmed the validity of this approach. Approximately 5000 genes were differentially expressed in the shoots of T. caerulescens compared with T. arvense, including genes involved in Zn transport and compartmentalization. Future functional analyses of genes identified as differentially expressed in the shoots of these closely related species will improve our understanding of the molecular mechanisms of Zn hyperaccumulation.
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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".