Molecular Link between Leaf Coloration and Gene Expression of Flavonoid and Carotenoid Biosynthesis in Camellia sinensis Cultivar ‘Huangjinya’
Bibliographic record
Abstract
‘Huangjinya’ is an excellent albino tea germplasm cultivated in China because of its bright colour and high amino acid content. It is light sensitive, with yellow leaves under intense light while green leaves under weak light. As well, the flavonoid and carotenoid levels increased after moderate shading treatment. However, the mechanism underlying this interesting phenomenon remains unclear. In this study, the transcriptome of ‘Huangjinya’ plants exposed to sunlight and shade were analyzed by high-throughput sequencing followed by de novo assembly. Shading ‘Huangjinya’ made its leaf colour turn green. De novo assembly showed that the transcriptome of ‘Huangjinya’ leaves comprises of 127,253 unigenes, with an average length of 914 nt. Among the 81,128 functionally annotated unigenes, 207 differentially expressed genes were identified, including 110 up-regulated and 97 down-regulated genes under moderate shading compared to full light. Gene ontology indicated that the differentially expressed genes are mainly involved in protein and ion binding and oxidoreductase activity. Antioxidation-related pathways, including flavonoid and carotenoid biosynthesis, were highly enriched in these functions. Shading inhibited the expression of flavonoid biosynthesis-associated genes and induced carotenoid biosynthesis-related genes. This would suggest that decreased flavonoid biosynthetic gene expression coincides with increased flavonoids (e.g catechin) content upon moderate shading, while carotenoid levels and biosynthetic gene expression are positively correlated in ‘Huangjinya’. In conclusion, the leaf colour changes in ‘Huangjinya’ are largely determined by the combined effects of flavonoid and carotenoid biosynthesis.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".