Association of Glutathione with Flowering in Arabidopsisthaliana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to study the relationship between GSH and flowering, wild-type and late-flowering mutant, fca-1, of Arabidopsis thaliana were treated with L-buthionine sulfoximine (BSO), a specific inhibitor of GSH biosynthesis, under long-day conditions. BSO treatment of the fca-1 mutant starting at 17 d after imbibition promoted flowering. However, when the treatment was started at 12 d after imbibition, BSO treatment at 10(-4) M resulted in an inhibition of flowering. This inhibitory effect of BSO on flowering was abolished by GSH treatment at 10(-4) M, although GSH treatment at an increased concentration of 10(-3) M clearly delayed flowering. In contrast, BSO treatment of wild-type plants starting at 12 d after imbibition promoted flowering, whose effect was abolished by GSH application. In the fca-1 mutant, whose endogenous GSH levels were high, chilling treatment lowered the GSH levels and promoted flowering, as was the case in the BSO treatment. An A. thaliana mutant, cad2-1, which has a defect in GSH biosynthesis also exhibited late flowering. The late-flowering phenotype of this mutant tended to be strengthened by BSO and abolished by GSH treatment. These results suggest that flowering is associated with the rate of GSH biosynthesis and/or the levels of GSH in A. thaliana.
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".