Exploiting CELLULOSE SYNTHASE (CESA) Class Specificity to Probe Cellulose Microfibril Biosynthesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cellulose microfibrils are the basic units of cellulose in plants. The structure of these microfibrils is at least partly determined by the structure of the cellulose synthase complex. In higher plants, this complex is composed of 18 to 24 catalytic subunits known as CELLULOSE SYNTHASE A (CESA) proteins. Three different classes of CESA proteins are required for cellulose synthesis and for secondary cell wall cellulose biosynthesis these classes are represented by CESA4, CESA7, and CESA8. To probe the relationship between CESA proteins and microfibril structure, we created mutant cesa proteins that lack catalytic activity but retain sufficient structural integrity to allow assembly of the cellulose synthase complex. Using a series of Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) mutants and genetic backgrounds, we found consistent differences in the ability of these mutant cesa proteins to complement the cellulose-deficient phenotype of the cesa null mutants. The best complementation was observed with catalytically inactive cesa4, while the equivalent mutation in cesa8 exhibited significantly lower levels of complementation. Using a variety of biophysical techniques, including solid-state nuclear magnetic resonance and Fourier transform infrared microscopy, to study these mutant plants, we found evidence for changes in cellulose microfibril structure, but these changes largely correlated with cellulose content and reflected differences in the relative proportions of primary and secondary cell walls. Our results suggest that individual CESA classes have similar roles in determining cellulose microfibril structure, and it is likely that the different effects of mutating members of different CESA classes are the consequence of their different catalytic activity and their influence on the overall rate of cellulose synthesis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".