MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Examining Trends in the Nonresidential Building Construction Producer Price Indexes (PPIs)

2014· article· en· W21680053 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Justin M Harper

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Plant Physiology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFacilities and Workplace Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndex (typography)Inflation (cosmology)Gross domestic productPrice indexQuarter (Canadian coin)Investment (military)EconomicsValue (mathematics)Construction industryBuilding constructionPrivate sectorGross fixed capital formationAgricultural economicsBusinessEngineeringMacroeconomicsEconomic growthStatisticsMathematicsGeographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The cell wall protein fraction (CWP) isolated from the biocontrol agent Pythium oligandrum induces defense reactions in tomato. CWP contains two novel elicitin-like proteins, POD-1 and POD-2, both with seven cysteines. To determine the essential structure in the defense-eliciting components of CWP, five fractions (F1, F2, F3, F4 and F5) were fractionated from CWP using cation chromatography and their components and disulfide bond compositions were analyzed. The expression levels of three defense-related genes (PR-6, LeCAS and PR-2b) were determined in tomato roots treated with each of the five fractions. Of the five fractions, F4 containing a heterohexamer of POD-1 and POD-2, and F5 containing a homohexamer of POD-1, both with disulfide bonds formed between all cysteine residues, induced the expression of three genes. F4 treatment also induced the accumulation of ethylene in tomato. The predicted three-dimensional structures of POD-1 and POD-2, and the results of SEC and MALDI-TOF MS analyses suggest that F4 consists of three POD-1 and POD-2 disulfide-bonded heterodimers that interleave into a hexameric ring through noncovalent association. These results suggest that this structure, which F5 also appears to form, is essential for stimulating defense responses in tomato.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.827
Threshold uncertainty score0.430

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Plant PhysiologySame topicFacilities and Workplace ManagementFrench-language works237,207