MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2566712365 · doi:10.1038/srep39087

The biosynthetic pathway of 2-azahypoxanthine in fairy-ring forming fungus

2016· article· en· W2566712365 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Tomohiro Suzuki, Naoki Yamamoto, Jae‐Hoon Choi, Tomoyuki Takano, Yohei Sasaki, Yurika Terashima, Akinobu Ito, Hideo Dohra, Hirofumi Hirai, Yukino Nakamura, Kentaro Yano, Hirokazu Kawagishi

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant Gene Expression Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of GeneticsShizuoka UniversityMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyMeiji University
KeywordsAdenine phosphoribosyltransferaseFungusMetaboliteBiochemistryGeneBiologyBiosynthesisMyceliumEnzymePurineBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

"Fairy rings" resulting from fungus-stimulated plant growth occur all over the world. In 2010, 2-azahypoxanthine (AHX) from a fungus Lepista sordida was identified as the "fairy" that stimulates plant growth. Furthermore, 2-aza-8-oxohypoxanthine (AOH) was isolated as a common metabolite of AHX in plants, and the endogenous existence of AHX and AOH in plants was proved. The structure of AHX allowed us to hypothesize that AHX was derived from 5-aminoimidazole-4-carboxamide ribonucleotide (AICAR). Thus, we performed a feeding experiment that supplied AICAR to L. sordida. Consumption of AICAR and accumulation of AHX were observed after feeding. The mycelia extract had enzymatic activity of adenine/5-aminoimidazole-4-carboxamide phosphoribosyltransferase (APRT). APRT gene of L. sordida revealed its structural characteristics in homology modeling and showed transcriptional enhancement after feeding. These results support that AHX was synthesized from AICAR and AHX biosynthesis was transcriptionally controlled by AICAR, indicating the presence of novel purine metabolic pathway in L. sordida.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.204

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations31
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicPlant Gene Expression AnalysisFrench-language works237,207