MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abscisic Acid: Emergence of a Core Signaling Network

2010· review· en· W2142175676 on OpenAlexaff
Sean R. Cutler, Pedro L. Rodrı́guez, Ruth Finkelstein, Suzanne R. Abrams

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Plant Biology · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Stress Responses and Tolerance
Canadian institutionsGovernment of SaskatchewanPlant Biotechnology InstituteGovernment of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbscisic acidPhosphataseSignal transductionBiologyCell biologyKinaseReceptorFunction (biology)PhosphorylationBiochemistryComputational biologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abscisic acid (ABA) regulates numerous developmental processes and adaptive stress responses in plants. Many ABA signaling components have been identified, but their interconnections and a consensus on the structure of the ABA signaling network have eluded researchers. Recently, several advances have led to the identification of ABA receptors and their three-dimensional structures, and an understanding of how key regulatory phosphatase and kinase activities are controlled by ABA. A new model for ABA action has been proposed and validated, in which the soluble PYR/PYL/RCAR receptors function at the apex of a negative regulatory pathway to directly regulate PP2C phosphatases, which in turn directly regulate SnRK2 kinases. This model unifies many previously defined signaling components and highlights the importance of future work focused on defining the direct targets of SnRK2s and PP2Cs, dissecting the mechanisms of hormone interactions (i.e., cross talk) and defining connections between this new negative regulatory pathway and other factors implicated in ABA signaling.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations3,150
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Review of Plant BiologySame topicPlant Stress Responses and ToleranceFrench-language works237,207