MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156029829 · doi:10.1104/pp.113.223560

Plastid Genome Instability Leads to Reactive Oxygen Species Production and Plastid-to-Nucleus Retrograde Signaling in Arabidopsis

2013· article· en· W2156029829 on OpenAlexaff
Elodie Lepage, Éric Zampini, Normand Brisson

Bibliographic record

VenuePLANT PHYSIOLOGY · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPhotosynthetic Processes and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlastidBiologyGenome instabilityArabidopsisArabidopsis thalianaGenomeGeneticsNuclear geneCell biologyGeneDNA damageChloroplastMutantDNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The plastid genome is highly conserved among plant species, suggesting that alterations of its structure would have dramatic impacts on plant fitness. Nevertheless, little is known about the direct consequences of plastid genome instability. Recently, it was reported that the plastid Whirly proteins WHY1 and WHY3 and a specialized type-I polymerase, POLIB, act as safeguards against plastid genome instability in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana). In this study, we use ciprofloxacin, an organelle double-strand break-inducing agent, and the why1why3polIb-1 variegated mutant to evaluate the impact of generalized plastid DNA instability. First, we show that in why1why3polIb-1 and ciprofloxacin-treated plants, plastid genome instability is associated with increased reactive oxygen species production. Then, using different light regimens, we show that the elevated reactive oxygen species production correlates with the appearance of a yellow-variegated phenotype in the why1why3polIb-1 population. This redox imbalance also correlates to modifications of nuclear gene expression patterns, which in turn leads to acclimation to high light. Taken together, these results indicate that plastid genome instability induces an oxidative burst that favors, through nuclear genetic reprogramming, adaptation to subsequent oxidative stresses.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.703

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.211
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations69
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLANT PHYSIOLOGYSame topicPhotosynthetic Processes and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207