Herbivore-Induced Defense Response in a Model Legume. Two-Spotted Spider Mites Induce Emission of (<i>E</i>)-<i>β</i>-Ocimene and Transcript Accumulation of (<i>E</i>)-<i>β</i>-Ocimene Synthase in <i>Lotus japonicus</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Indirect defense of plants against herbivores often involves the induced emission of volatile infochemicals including terpenoids that attract natural enemies of the herbivores. We report the isolation and characterization of a terpene synthase cDNA (LjEbetaOS) from a model legume, Lotus japonicus. Recombinant LjEbetaOS enzyme produced (E)-beta-ocimene (98%) and its Z-isomer (2%). Transcripts of LjEbetaOS were induced in L. japonicus plants infested with two-spotted spider mites (Tetranychus urticae), coinciding with increasing emissions of (E)-beta-ocimene as well as other volatiles, (Z)-3-hexenyl acetate and (E)-4,8-dimethyl-1,3,7-nonatriene, by the infested plants. We suggest that LjEbetaOS is involved in the herbivore-induced indirect defense response of spider mite-infested L. japonicus via de novo formation and emission (E)-beta-ocimene. Mechanical wounding of the leaves or application of alamethicin (ALA), a potent fungal elicitor of plant volatile emission, also induced transiently increased levels of LjEbetaOS transcripts in L. japonicus. However, wounding or ALA did not result in elevated release of (E)-beta-ocimene. Differences in volatile emissions after herbivory, mechanical wounding, or treatment with ALA suggest that neither a single mechanical wounding event nor ALA simulate the effect of herbivore activity and indicate that herbivore-induced emission of (E)-beta-ocimene in L. japonicus involves control mechanisms in addition to up-regulation of LjEbetaOS transcripts.
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".