A survey of Populus PIN-FORMED family genes reveals their diversified expression patterns
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The plant hormone auxin is a key regulator of plant development, and its uneven distribution maintained by polar intercellular auxin transport in plant tissues can trigger a wide range of developmental processes. Although the roles of PIN-FORMED (PIN) proteins in intercellular auxin flow have been extensively characterized in Arabidopsis, their roles in woody plants remain unclear. Here, a comprehensive analysis of PIN proteins in Populus is presented. Fifteen PINs are encoded in the genome of Populus, including four PIN1s, one PIN2, two PIN3s, three PIN5s, three PIN6s, and two PIN8s. Similar to Arabidopsis AtPIN proteins, PtPINs share conserved topology and transmembrane domains, and are either plasma membrane- or endoplasmic reticulum-localized. The more diversified expansion of the PIN family in Populus, comparing to that in Arabidopsis, indicates that some auxin-regulated developmental processes, such as secondary growth, may exhibit unique features in trees. More importantly, different sets of PtoPINs have been found to be strongly expressed in the roots, leaves, and cambium in Populus; the dynamic expression patterns of selected PtoPINs were further examined during the regeneration of shoots and roots. This genome-wide analysis of the Populus PIN family provides important cues for their potential roles in tree growth and development.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".