MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2357314118

CLONING AND GENETIC TRANSFORMATION OF OSNADK3 GENE IN RICE

2011· article· en· W2357314118 on OpenAlexaff
Guo Wan-li

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nuclear Agricultural Sciences · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Molecular Biology Research
Canadian institutionsScience North
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMutantGeneTransformation (genetics)Oryza sativaBiologyArabidopsisTransgeneGenetically modified riceSubcellular localizationGeneticsWild typeCloning (programming)Gene knockoutCallusMolecular biologyExpression vectorCytoplasmic male sterilityGenetically modified cropsRecombinant DNA
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A heterozygote of OSNADK3gene knockout mutant of rice was identified from the T-DNA insertion mutant line PFG_3A-04871.R,which was ordered from Pohang University of Science and Technology(POSTECH).The heterozygous mutant with OSNADK3 gene knockout has distinct phenotypes from wild type Dongjing(Oryza sativa L.var.japonica cv Dongjing),such as small plants,abnormal flowering development,sterile seeds,and so on.To get further insight on the function of OSNADK3(NAD Kinase 3),the CDS fragment of OSNADK3gene was cloned from rice(cv Dongjing) by means of RT-PCR.Fusion expressing vector pCAMBIA1301::35S:: NADK3::GFP(pCNG) was constructed with the gene of OSNADK3 fusing in fragment with the pCAMBIA1301::35S::GFP(pCG).A transient expression test showed that the vector pCNG could be expressed in Arabidopsis thalianaand OSNADK3 is a cytoplasmic enzyme according to the subcellular localization.At the same time,pCNGwas introduced into rice callus with agrobacterium-mediated method and 24 transgenic plants were obtained.The results provided a good prefoundation for further studies to understand the function and mechanism of OSNADK3 in stress response and development of rice.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nuclear Agricultural SciencesSame topicPlant Molecular Biology ResearchFrench-language works237,207