Genetics and Biochemistry of Zero-Tannin Lentils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The zero-tannin trait in lentil is controlled by a single recessive gene (tan) that results in a phenotype characterized by green stems, white flowers, and thin, transparent, or translucent seed coats. Genes that result in zero-tannin characteristics are useful for studies of seed coat pigmentation and biochemical characters because they have altered pigmentation. In this study, one of the major groups of plant pigments, phenolic compounds, was compared among zero-tannin and normal phenotypes and genotypes of lentil. Biochemical data were obtained by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS). Genomic sequencing was used to identify a candidate gene for the tan locus. Phenolic compound profiling revealed that myricetin, dihydromyricetin, flavan-3-ols, and proanthocyanidins are only detected in normal lentil phenotypes and not in zero-tannin types. The molecular analysis showed that the tan gene encodes a bHLH transcription factor, homologous to the A gene in pea. The results of this study suggest that tan as a bHLH transcription factor interacts with the regulatory genes in the biochemical pathway of phenolic compounds starting from flavonoid-3',5'-hydroxylase (F3'5'H) and dihydroflavonol reductase (DFR).
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".