Identification of nitrogen responsive genes in poplar roots grown under two contrasting nitrogen levels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated the short-term response of poplar roots to low and high nitrogen availability in order to elucidate the mechanisms involved in nutrient acquisition. After 28 days of fertilization with low versus high ammonium nitrate, an increase in aboveground biomass was observed accompanied by a decrease in root biomass, reducing the root: shoot ratio after 28 days. These changes in biomass allocation were accompanied by changes in root architecture and altered gene expression. The gene expression response was evaluated after 7 days using a custom cDNA micrarray following transfer to low and high nitrogen supply. We found that 56 sequences were differentially expressed in poplar roots. Many of these 56 genes could be associated with putative roles in development or response to biotic and abiotic stress. A time course analysis of selected cell wall-related genes by RT-qPCR confirmed the expression patterns obtained by microarray and also showed the timing of this differential response. Our results show that patterns of transcript accumulation in roots of poplars are influenced by nitrogen supply, providing evidence of unique nitrogen-adaptative mechanisms.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".