MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2789283136 · doi:10.1038/s41598-018-21377-y

Co-expression network analysis and cis-regulatory element enrichment determine putative functions and regulatory mechanisms of grapevine ATL E3 ubiquitin ligases

2018· article· en· W2789283136 on OpenAlexaff
Darren C. J. Wong, Pietro Ariani, Simone D. Castellarin, Annalisa Polverari, Elodie Vandelle

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant Gene Expression Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUbiquitinBiologyGeneTranscriptomeUbiquitin ligaseZinc fingerGeneticsArabidopsis thalianaArabidopsisGene expressionRegulation of gene expressionUbiquitin-Protein LigasesTranscriptional regulationComputational biologyCell biologyTranscription factorMutant

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Arabidopsis thaliana Toxicos en Levadura (ATL) proteins are a subclass of the RING-H2 zinc finger binding E3 ubiquitin ligases. The grapevine (Vitis vinifera) ATL family was recently characterized, revealing 96 members that are likely to be involved in several physiological processes through protein ubiquitination. However, the final targets and biological functions of most ATL E3 ligases are still unknown. We analyzed the co-expression networks among grapevine ATL genes across a set of transcriptomic data related to defense and abiotic stress, combined with a condition-independent dataset. This revealed strong correlations between ATL proteins and diverse signal transduction components and transcriptional regulators, in particular those involved in immunity. An enrichment analysis of cis-regulatory elements in ATL gene promoters and related co-expressed genes highlighted the importance of hormones in the regulation of ATL gene expression. Our work identified several ATL proteins as candidates for further studies aiming to decipher specific grapevine resistance mechanisms activated in response to pathogens.

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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.713

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.249
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations11
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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