MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2283846911 · doi:10.1139/cjps-2015-0118

Molecular characterization and expression pattern of sorbitol transporter gene <i>PbSOT2</i> in Pear (<i>Pyrus bretschneideri</i> Rehd.) fruit

2016· article· en· W2283846911 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lifen Wang, Xiaoxiao Qi, Yanan Yang, Shaoling Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant nutrient uptake and metabolism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSorbitolMajor facilitator superfamilyPEARBiologyBotanyBiochemistryChemistryTransporterGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sorbitol is a primary photosynthetic product and the principal photosynthetic transport substance in plants of the Rosaceae. Sorbitol transporters in the major facilitator superfamily (MFS) are important for phloem loading and sorbitol uptake into sink tissues. Here we report the cloning, localization, and expression analysis of a sorbitol transporter in fruit of Pyrus bretschneideri Rehd. cv. “Yali.” This clone, named PbSOT2, encoded a 537-aa protein with a calculated molecular mass of 57.92 kDa. The predicted protein had 12 transmembrane domains and belonged to the MFS carriers. PbSOT2 was sub-cellularly targeted to the plasma membrane. The expression of PbSOT2 was highest during the rapid enlargement phase of fruit (100 days after full bloom). In addition, the sorbitol content in fruit fluctuated within certain limits, but its proportion of total sugars decreased continuously. This work shows that PbSOT2 may play a role in fruit enlargement and the accumulation of hexose during fruit development.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.172
Teacher spread0.163 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations16
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant ScienceSame topicPlant nutrient uptake and metabolismFrench-language works237,207