Occurrence, structure, and evolution of nitric oxide synthase–like proteins in the plant kingdom
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nitric oxide (NO) signaling regulates various physiological processes in both animals and plants. In animals, NO synthesis is mainly catalyzed by NO synthase (NOS) enzymes. Although NOS-like activities that are sensitive to mammalian NOS inhibitors have been detected in plant extracts, few bona fide plant NOS enzymes have been identified. We searched the data set produced by the 1000 Plants (1KP) international consortium for the presence of transcripts encoding NOS-like proteins in over 1000 species of land plants and algae. We also searched for genes encoding NOS-like enzymes in 24 publicly available algal genomes. We identified no typical NOS sequences in 1087 sequenced transcriptomes of land plants. In contrast, we identified NOS-like sequences in 15 of the 265 algal species analyzed. Even if the presence of NOS enzymes assembled from multipolypeptides in plants cannot be conclusively discarded, the emerging data suggest that, instead of generating NO with evolutionarily conserved NOS enzymes, land plants have evolved finely regulated nitrate assimilation and reduction processes to synthesize NO through a mechanism different than that in animals.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".