MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2727189471 · doi:10.1093/aobpla/plx030

Patterns of Arabidopsis gene expression in the face of hypobaric stress

2017· article· en· W2727189471 on OpenAlexaff
Anna‐Lisa Paul, Mingqi Zhou, Jordan Callaham, Matthew Reyes, Michael Stasiak, Alberto Riva, Agata K. Żupańska, Mike Dixon, Robert J. Ferl

Bibliographic record

VenueAoB Plants · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant responses to water stress
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyAbiotic componentAltitude (triangle)Effects of high altitude on humansAdaptation (eye)BiomeEcologyHypoxia (environmental)Abiotic stressPhotosynthesisTerrestrial plantDrought stressGeneBotanyOxygenEcosystemChemistryGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extreme hypobaria is a novel abiotic stress that is outside the evolutionary experience of terrestrial plants. In natural environments, the practical limit of atmospheric pressure experienced by higher plants is about 50 kPa or about 0.5 atmospheres; a limit that is primarily imposed by the combined stresses inherent to high altitude conditions of terrestrial mountains. However, in highly controlled chambers, and within projected extra-terrestrial greenhouses, the atmospheric pressure component can be isolated from the associated high altitude stresses such as temperature, desiccation and even hypoxia. Such chambers allow the exploration of hypobaria as a single variable that can be carried to extremes beyond what is possible in terrestrial biomes. Here, we examine the organ-specific progression of transcriptional strategies for the physiological adaptation to various degrees of hypobaric stress, as well as the response to severe hypobaria over time. An abrupt transition from a near-sea level pressure of 97 kPa to a mere 5 kPa is accompanied by the differential expression of hundreds of genes, primarily those associated with drought, hypoxia and cell wall metabolism. However, pressure transitions between these two extremes reveals that plants respond with complex, organ-specific transcriptomic responses, which also vary over time. These responses are not linear; neither with respect to the gradient of hypobaric severity from 75, 50, 25 to 10 kPa, nor with the duration of exposure of up to 3 days at 10 kPa. In the first few hours of hypobaria, plants engage changes in basic metabolism and hormonally mediated growth and development. After 12 or more hours of hypobaria, the gene expression patterns are more indicative of hypoxia and drought environmental responses. The hypobaria transcription patterns were highly organ specific, and roots appeared to be more sensitive to hypobaria than shoots in that the number of differentially expressed genes was higher in roots than in shoots. The patterns of gene expression among organs, across a gradient of atmospheric pressures and over time suggest that plants adapt to the novel stress of pure hypobaria by using recognizable metabolisms to meet appropriately interpreted hypoxia stresses, while engaging drought responses that are seemingly inappropriate to the wet and humid environment of the chambers.

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)0.000
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 score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations15
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAoB PlantsSame topicPlant responses to water stressFrench-language works237,207