MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2938732818 · doi:10.1080/15592324.2019.1604017

MKP1 acts as a key modulator of stomatal development

2019· article· en· W2938732818 on OpenAlexafffund
Raman Jangra, Hassan Damen, Jin‐Suk Lee

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Signaling & Behavior · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Molecular Biology Research
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologyArabidopsisMAPK/ERK pathwayCell biologyKinaseSignal transductionCell fate determinationArabidopsis thalianaRegulatorBiochemistryTranscription factorMutantGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The MAPK signaling cascade is universal among eukaryotes and mediates a variety of environmental and developmental responses. Two Arabidopsis MAPKs, MPK3 and MPK6, have been shown to be activated by various stimuli and suggested as a convergence point of different signaling pathways. It is known that these MAPKs, MPK3/MPK6, control the discrete stages of stomatal development in Arabidopsis, but how they are regulated and how the same MAPK components can achieve signaling specificity is largely unknown. We recently demonstrated that MAP Kinase Phosphatase 1 (MKP1) promotes stomatal differentiation by suppressing activation of MPK3/MPK6 in the stomatal lineage. By expressing MKP1 in discrete stomatal precursor cell types, we further identified that MKP1 plays an important role at the early stage of stomatal development for the cell fate transition leading to stomatal differentiation. While MKP1 was previously known as a key regulator of environmental stress responses, our data illustrate a novel role of MKP1 in plant development: it acts as one of the specificity-determining regulators of MAPK signaling to enforce proper stomatal development in Arabidopsis.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.193
Threshold uncertainty score0.720

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant Signaling & BehaviorSame topicPlant Molecular Biology ResearchFrench-language works237,207