MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Integrative meta-analysis of transcriptomic responses to abiotic stress in cotton

2019· review· en· W2916957030 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProgress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicResearch in Cotton Cultivation
Canadian institutionsEtobicoke General Hospital
FundersShiraz University of Medical Sciences
KeywordsKEGGBiologyTranscriptomeGeneAbiotic stressGeneticsTranscription factorComputational biologyGene expression profilingGene regulatory networkAbiotic componentGenomeGene expressionEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abiotic environmental stresses are important factors that limit the growth, fiber yield, and quality of cotton. In this study, an integrative meta-analysis and a system-biology analysis were performed to explore the underlying transcriptomic mechanisms that are critical for response to stresses. From the meta-analysis, it was observed that a total of 1465 differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between normal and stress conditions. Gene Ontology (GO) and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) pathway enrichment analysis revealed that DEGs were significantly enriched in the ubiquitin-dependent process, biosynthesis of secondary metabolites, plant hormone, and signaled transduction. The results also indicated that some of DEGs were assigned to transcription factors (TFs). A total of 148 TFs belonged to 25 conserved families were identified that among them S1Fa-like, ERF, NAC, bZIP families, were the most abundant groups. Moreover, we searched in upstream regions of DEGs for over-represented DNA motifs and were able to identify 11 conserved sequence motifs. The functional analysis of these motifs revealed that they were involved in regulation of transcription, DNA replication, cytoskeleton organization, and translation. Weighted gene co-expression network analysis (WGCNA) uncovered 12 distinct co-expression modules. Four modules were significantly associated with genes involved in response to stress and cell wall organization. The network analysis also identified hub genes such as RTNLB5 and PRA1, which may be involved in regulating stress response. The findings could help to understand the mechanisms of response to abiotic stress and introduce candidate genes that may be beneficial to cotton plant breeding programs.

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.

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)0.000
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score0.535

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
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 head0.144
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.272 · 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