MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2770204312 · doi:10.1111/tpj.13780

Oh, the places they'll go! A survey of phytopathogen effectors and their host targets

2017· review· en· W2770204312 on OpenAlexafffund
Madiha Khan, Derek Seto, Rajagopal Subramaniam, Darrell Desveaux

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Plant Journal · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant-Microbe Interactions and Immunity
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHost (biology)EffectorBiologyGeographyEcologyCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Phytopathogens translocate effector proteins into plant cells where they sabotage the host cellular machinery to promote infection. An individual pathogen can translocate numerous distinct effectors during the infection process to target an array of host macromolecules (proteins, metabolites, DNA, etc.) and manipulate them using a variety of enzymatic activities. In this review, we have surveyed the literature for effector targets and curated them to convey the range of functions carried out by phytopathogenic proteins inside host cells. In particular, we have curated the locations of effector targets, as well as their biological and molecular functions and compared these properties across diverse phytopathogens. This analysis validates previous observations about effector functions (e.g. immunosuppression), and also highlights some interesting features regarding effector specificity as well as functional diversification of phytopathogen virulence strategies.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations171
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Plant JournalSame topicPlant-Microbe Interactions and ImmunityFrench-language works237,207