MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2604602420 · doi:10.4141/cjps2012-338

Analysis and integration of microarray data of <i>Arabidopsis</i> mutants

2014· article· en· W2604602420 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Daxiang Zhou, Renhua Liu, Xiong Shu

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicFungal and yeast genetics research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChongqing Three Gorges UniversityNatural Science Foundation Project of Chongqing, Chongqing Science and Technology CommissionChina Three Gorges UniversityNatural Science Foundation of ChongqingNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaChongqing Municipal Education CommissionChongqing Science and Technology Commission
KeywordsMicroarray analysis techniquesArabidopsis thalianaArabidopsisMutantMicroarrayBiologyComputational biologyMicroarray databasesGeneGene chip analysisGeneticsGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Zhou, D., Liu, R. and Xiong, S. 2014. Analysis and integration of microarray data of Arabidopsis mutants. Can. J. Plant Sci. 94: 235–243. Nowadays, high-throughput microarray data make it possible to study biological data on a large scale. It has successfully been applied to the gene function prediction in yeast, hypersensitive response in response to pathogen and human cancer. However, within the microarray data, there exists lots of unknown information which is worth mining. Based on mutants’ signature genes of Arabidopsis thaliana, we constructed a reference matrix including 267 pairs of subsets of differential reference profiles. We analyzed our data through expression profiles and connectivity map. Two notable results were detected by comparing every mutant in the matrix. Above all, the data mining procedure confirmed the biological relations not only between different stresses and glucose metabolism, but also stresses and MAPK signaling pathway among HSP90, PGM, VTE1, AXR4, SFR6, and SFR2 mutants. In addition, sfr6 might be involved in light cycle regulations, in accordance with the results of the overlap analysis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant Science→Same topicFungal and yeast genetics research→French-language works237,207→