MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2155882616 · doi:10.1071/fp02116

Cloning and expression of two plasma membrane aquaporins expressed during the ripening of grape berry

2003· article· en· W2155882616 on OpenAlexaff
S. Picaud, Frédéric Becq, Fabienne Dédaldéchamp, Agnès Ageorges, Serge Delrot

Bibliographic record

VenueFunctional Plant Biology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicIon Transport and Channel Regulation
Canadian institutionsMinistère des Transports
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAquaporinRipeningBerryBiologyVeraisonBotanyVitis viniferaMusaceaeXenopusHorticultureBiochemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ripening of grape ( Vitis vinifera L.) berry is accompanied by dramatic accumulation of sugars and water. Two full-length clones and several partial clones encoding plasma membrane aquaporins (PIP) were cloned from grape berries collected at the beginning of ripening. Based on their sequences, on a phylogenetic analysis and on functional properties, both clones, called VvPIP1a and VvPIP1b were assigned to the PIP1 subfamily. RNA gel blot studies with berries at various stages of development indicated that VvPIP expression was highest at stages following veraison. Injection of Xenopus oocytes with VvPIP1a cRNA induced a moderate increase of water permeability and a large increase in glycerol permeability, whereas injection with VvPIP1b cRNA did not affect these permeabilities. Injection of VvPIP1a cRNA, but not VvPIP1b cRNA, inhibited urea uptake by the oocyte, and this inhibition was sensitive to HgCl2. The data are discussed in relation with the potential role of aquaporins in fruit physiology.

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 score0.004

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations63
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFunctional Plant BiologySame topicIon Transport and Channel RegulationFrench-language works237,207