Wound-Induced Terpene Synthase Gene Expression in Sitka Spruce That Exhibit Resistance or Susceptibility to Attack by the White Pine Weevil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We analyzed the expression pattern of various terpene synthase (TPS) genes in response to a wounding injury applied to the apical leader of Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis Bong. Carr.) genotypes known to be resistant (R) or susceptible (S) to white pine weevil (Pissodes strobi Peck.) attack. The purpose was to test if differences in constitutive or wound-induced TPS expression can be associated with established weevil resistance. All wounding treatments were conducted on 9-year-old R and S trees growing under natural field conditions within the range of variation for weevil R and S genotypes. Representative cDNAs of the monoterpene synthase (mono-TPS), sesquiterpene synthase (sesqui-TPS), and diterpene synthase (di-TPS) classes were isolated from Sitka spruce to assess TPS transcript levels. Based on amino acid sequence similarity, the cDNAs resemble Norway spruce (Picea abies) (-)-linalool synthase (mono-TPS; PsTPS-Linl) and levopimaradiene/abietadiene synthase (di-TPS; PsTPS-LASl), and grand fir (Abies grandis) delta-selinene synthase (sesqui-TPS; PsTPS-Sell). One other mono-TPS was functionally identified as (-)-limonene synthase (PsTPS-Lim). No significant difference in constitutive expression levels for these TPSs was detected between R and S trees. However, over a postwounding period of 16 d, only R trees exhibited significant transcript accumulation for the mono- and sesqui-TPS tested. Both R and S trees exhibited a significant accumulation of PsTPS-LASl transcripts. An assessment of traumatic resin duct formation in wounded leaders showed that both R and S trees responded by forming traumatic resin ducts; however, the magnitude of this response was significantly greater in R trees. Collectively, our data imply that the induced resinosis response is an important aspect of defense in weevil R Sitka spruce trees growing under natural conditions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".