TGACG‐BINDING FACTORs (TGAs) and TGA‐interacting CC‐type glutaredoxins modulate hyponastic growth in <i>Arabidopsis thaliana</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
TGACG-BINDING FACTORs (TGAs) control the developmental or defense-related processes. In Arabidopsis thaliana, the functions of at least TGA2 and PERIANTHIA (PAN) can be repressed by interacting with CC-type glutaredoxins, which have the potential to control the redox state of target proteins. As TGA1 can be redox modulated in planta, we analyzed whether some of the 21 CC-type glutaredoxins (ROXYs) encoded in the Arabidopsis genome can influence TGA1 activity in planta and whether the redox active cysteines of TGA1 are functionally important. We show that the tga1 tga4 mutant and plants ectopically expressing ROXY8 or ROXY9 are impaired in hyponastic growth. As expression of ROXY8 and ROXY9 is activated upon transfer of plants from hyponasty-inducing low light to normal light, they might interfere with the growth-promoting function of TGA1/TGA4 to facilitate reversal of hyponastic growth. The redox-sensitive cysteines of TGA1 are not required for induction or reversal of hyponastic growth. TGA1 and TGA4 interact with ROXYs 8, 9, 18, and 19/GRX480, but ectopically expressed ROXY18 and ROXY19/GRX480 do not interfere with hyponastic growth. Our results therefore demonstrate functional specificities of individual ROXYs for distinct TGAs despite promiscuous protein-protein interactions and point to different repression mechanisms, depending on the TGA/ROXY combination.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".