Functional and evolutionary analysis of two CBF genes in <i>Prunus mume</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Zhang, J., Yang, W. R., Cheng, T. R., Pan, H. T. and Zhang, Q. X. 2013. Functional and evolutionary analysis of two CBF genes in Prunus mume . Can. J. Plant Sci. 93: 455–464. Primers based on the C-repeat (CRT)/dehydration responsive element (DRE) binding factor of peach (Prunus persica), sweet cherry (Prunus avim) and other related family member sequences found in GenBank were designed. Fragments of C-repeat binding factor (CBF) genes were isolated from Prunus mume by PCR and RT-PCR. The two CBF genes, designated PmCBFa and PmCBFb, were 821 bp and 741 bp long, encoding putative proteins of 238 and 225 amino acids, respectively, which contain all the conserved CBF protein domains. Similar to other CBF homologs, PmCBFa and PmCBFb may be constitutive and can be induced at a low temperature. Phylogenetic analysis using known CBF homologs indicated that all monocot CBF genes belong to the same group, separated from the eudicot CBF genes. The PmCBF genes are the homologs of the sweet cherry PaDREB gene. Sequencing of 16 cultivars and a wild species, ‘Zang’ Mei, characterized the intraspecific molecular evolution of the Prunus mume CBF genes, and the preliminary analysis indicates that the nucleotide diversity is low in coding area of PmCBFa.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".