MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2326348707 · doi:10.1139/gen-2013-0143

Comprehensive analysis of the homeodomain-leucine zipper IV transcription factor family in<i>Cucumis sativus</i>

2013· article· en· W2326348707 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rao Fu, Wei Liu, Qiang Li, Jing Li, Lina Wang, Zhonghai Ren

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Molecular Biology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGovernment of Shandong ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsCucumisLeucine zipperBiologyGeneHomeoboxGeneticsBasic helix-loop-helix leucine zipper transcription factorsExonTranscription factorATF3IntronGene duplicationZipperAlternative splicingGene expressionBotanyDNA-binding proteinPromoter

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The class IV homeodomain-leucine zipper (HD-Zip IV) proteins are plant-specific transcriptional factors known to play crucial roles in plant growth and development. In this study, 11 cucumber (Cucumis sativus) HD-Zip IV genes were identified in the version 2 cucumber genome and found to be distributed unevenly across the chromosomes. The CsHDZIV (Cucumis sativus homeodomain-leucine zipper IV) gene family is smaller than in other studied species (except for rice) because of the absence of gene duplication events. Phylogenetic analysis showed that HD-Zip IV genes from cucumber, Arabidopsis, tomato, cotton, maize, and rice could be classified into five subgroups. All CsHDZIV genes appear to be derived from a basic module containing 11 exons in the coding region. Two conserved motifs of 21 and 19 nucleotides were found in the 3'-untranslated regions of six CsHDZIV genes, suggesting that post-transcriptional regulation may play a role in regulation of CsHDZIV genes. In addition, 6 of 11 CsHDZIV genes were found to undergo alternative splicing events. Reverse transcription PCR analysis showed that all CsHDZIV genes (except one) were expressed and showed preferential expression in reproductive organs.

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)0.000
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 score0.966
Threshold uncertainty score0.565

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations28
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicPlant Molecular Biology ResearchFrench-language works237,207