Genome-wide analysis of the SPL/miR156 module and its interaction with the AP2/miR172 unit in barley
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The SQUAMOSA-promoter binding like (SPL) gene family encodes transcription factors that have been shown in many species to influence plant growth and development, but information about these genes in barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) is limited. This study identified 17 barley SPL genes, within eight distinct groups, that are orthologs of SPL genes described in Arabidopsis, wheat, and rice. Sixteen barley SPLs undergo alternative splicing. Seven SPLs contain a putative miR156 target site and the transcript levels of the miR156-targeted HvSPLs (HvSPL3, 13 and 23) were lower in vegetative than in reproductive phase but this was true also for some SPL genes such as HvSPL6 that were not regulated by miR156. Because SPL gene products regulate miR172, which is also involved in floral development, the expression of miR172 was studied. An antagonistic expression pattern of miR156 and miR172b during the vegetative and the reproductive phases signifies their apparent function in barley growth phase transition. Characterization of a barley mir172 mutant having an abnormal, indeterminate spikelet phenotype suggests the possible feedback role of AP2/miR172 module on HvSPL genes. This is the first comprehensive analysis of the miR156/SPL/miR172 axis in barley that provides a basis to elucidate their roles in various biological processes.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".