MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161854638 · doi:10.1093/jxb/erh248

Recent developments in understanding the regulation of starch metabolism in higher plants

2004· review· en· W2161854638 on OpenAlexaff
Ian J. Tetlow

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Botany · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicCassava research and cyanide
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlastidEnzymeMetabolismBiochemistryMetabolic pathwayRedoxPosttranslational modificationBiologyPlant metabolismProtein biosynthesisChemistryGeneRNAChloroplast

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article reviews current knowledge of starch metabolism in higher plants, and focuses on the control and regulation of the biosynthetic and degradative pathways. The major elements comprising the synthetic and degradative pathways in plastids are discussed, and show that, despite present knowledge of the core reactions within each pathway, understanding of how these individual reactions are co-ordinated within different plastid types and under different environmental conditions, is far from complete. In particular, recently discovered aspects of the fine control of starch metabolism are discussed, which indicate that a number of key reactions are controlled by post-translational modifications of enzymes, including redox modulation and protein phosphorylation. In some cases, enzymes of the pathway may form protein complexes with specific functional significance. It is suggested that some of the newly discovered aspects of fine control of the biosynthetic pathway may well apply to many other proteins which are directly and indirectly involved in polymer synthesis and degradation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.187
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.167 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations379
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental BotanySame topicCassava research and cyanideFrench-language works237,207