MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134212722 · doi:10.1104/pp.124.1.285

Polyphenol Oxidase from Hybrid Poplar. Cloning and Expression in Response to Wounding and Herbivory

2000· article· en· W2134212722 on OpenAlexafffund
C. Peter Constabel, Lynn Yip, Joseph Patton, Mary E. Christopher

Bibliographic record

VenuePLANT PHYSIOLOGY · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect behavior and control techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPopulus trichocarpaPolyphenol oxidaseMethyl jasmonateBiologyInsectComplementary DNABotanyCatechol oxidaseSalicaceaeCloning (programming)HerbivoreGeneEnzymeBiochemistryWoody plant

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The inducible expression of polyphenol oxidase (PPO), a presumed antiherbivore enzyme, was examined in hybrid poplar (Populus trichocarpa x Populus deltoides). Following mechanical wounding simulating insect damage, PPO activity increased dramatically in wounded and unwounded leaves on wounded plants beginning at 24 and 48 h, respectively. A hybrid poplar PPO cDNA was isolated and its nucleotide sequence determined. On northern blots, PPO transcripts were detected within 8 h of wounding, and reached peak levels at 16 and 24 h in wounded and unwounded leaves, respectively. Methyl jasmonate spray and feeding by forest tent caterpillar also induced PPO expression. The induction of PPO was strongest in the youngest four leaves, which were generally avoided by caterpillars in free feeding experiments. This wound- and herbivore-induced expression of PPO in hybrid poplar supports the defensive role of this protein against insect pests.

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 score0.003

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations288
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLANT PHYSIOLOGYSame topicInsect behavior and control techniquesFrench-language works237,207