Fluorescent Protein Aided Insights on Plastids and their Extensions: A Critical Appraisal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multi-colored fluorescent proteins targeted to plastids have provided new insights on the dynamic behavior of these organelles and their interactions with other cytoplasmic components and compartments. Sub-plastidic components such as thylakoids, stroma, the inner and outer membranes of the plastid envelope, nucleoids, plastoglobuli, and starch grains have been efficiently highlighted in living plant cells. In addition, stroma filled membrane extensions called stromules have drawn attention to the dynamic nature of the plastid and its interactions with the rest of the cell. Use of dual and triple fluorescent protein combinations has begun to reveal plastid interactions with mitochondria, the nucleus, the endoplasmic reticulum and F-actin and suggests integral roles of plastids in retrograde signaling, cell to cell communication as well as plant-pathogen interactions. While the rapid advances and insights achieved through fluorescent protein based research on plastids are commendable it is necessary to endorse meaningful observations but subject others to closer scrutiny. Here, in order to develop a better and more comprehensive understanding of plastids and their extensions we provide a critical appraisal of recent information that has been acquired using targeted fluorescent protein probes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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.
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".