A role for <i><scp>SPEECHLESS</scp></i> in the integration of leaf stomatal patterning with the growth vs disease trade‐off in poplar
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Occurrence of stomata on both leaf surfaces (amphistomaty) promotes higher stomatal conductance and photosynthesis while simultaneously increasing exposure to potential disease agents in black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa). A genome-wide association study (GWAS) with 2.2M single nucleotide polymorphisms generated through whole-genome sequencing found 280 loci associated with variation in adaxial stomatal traits, implicating genes regulating stomatal development and behavior. Strikingly, numerous loci regulating plant growth and response to biotic and abiotic stresses were also identified. The most significant locus was a poplar homologue of SPEECHLESS (PtSPCH1). Individuals possessing PtSPCH1 alleles associated with greater adaxial stomatal density originated primarily from environments with shorter growing seasons (e.g. northern latitudes, high elevations) or with less precipitation. PtSPCH1 was expressed in developing leaves but not developing stem xylem. In developing leaves, RNA sequencing showed patterns of coordinated expression between PtSPCH1 and other GWAS-identified genes. The breadth of our GWAS results suggests that the evolution of amphistomaty is part of a larger, complex response in plants. Suites of genes underpin this response, retrieved through genetic association to adaxial stomata, and show coordinated expression during development. We propose that the occurrence of amphistomaty in P. trichocarpa involves PtSPCH1 and reflects selection for supporting rapid growth over investment in immunity.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".