MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901945314 · doi:10.1111/tpj.14165

Reporter‐based forward genetic screen to identify bundle sheath anatomy mutants in <i>A. thaliana</i>

2018· article· en· W2901945314 on OpenAlexaff
Florian Döring, Kumari Billakurthi, Udo Gowik, Stefanie Sultmanis, Roxana Khoshravesh, Shipan Das Gupta, Tammy L. Sage, Peter Westhoff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Plant Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPhotosynthetic Processes and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersHeinrich-Heine-Universität DüsseldorfDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftEuropean Commission
KeywordsAnatomyBundleMutantArabidopsis thalianaBiologyGeneticsGeneMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary The evolution of C4 photosynthesis proceeded stepwise with each small step increasing the fitness of the plant. An important pre‐condition for the introduction of a functional C4 cycle is the photosynthetic activation of the C3 bundle sheath by increasing its volume and organelle number. Therefore, to engineer C4 photosynthesis into existing C3 crops, information about genes that control the bundle sheath cell size and organelle content is needed. However, very little information is known about the genes that could be manipulated to create a more C4–like bundle sheath. To this end, an ethylmethanesulfonate (EMS)‐based forward genetic screen was established in the Brassicaceae C3 species Arabidopsis thaliana. To ensure a high‐throughput primary screen, the bundle sheath cells of A. thaliana were labeled using a luciferase (LUC68) or by a chloroplast‐targeted green fluorescent protein (sGFP) reporter using a bundle sheath specific promoter. The signal strengths of the reporter genes were used as a proxy to search for mutants with altered bundle sheath anatomy. Here, we show that our genetic screen predominantly identified mutants that were primarily affected in the architecture of the vascular bundle, and led to an increase in bundle sheath volume. By using a mapping‐by‐sequencing approach the genomic segments that contained mutated candidate genes were identified.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 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

Citations12
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Plant JournalSame topicPhotosynthetic Processes and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207