Pollination Type Recognition from a Distance by the Ovary Is Revealed Through a Global Transcriptomic Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sexual reproduction in flowering plants involves intimate contact and continuous interactions between the growing pollen tube and the female reproductive structures. These interactions can trigger responses in distal regions of the flower well ahead of fertilization. While pollination-induced petal senescence has been studied extensively, less is known about how pollination is perceived at a distance in the ovary, and how specific this response is to various pollen genotypes. To address this question, we performed a global transcriptomic analysis in the ovary of a wild potato species, Solanum chacoense, at various time points following compatible, incompatible, and heterospecific pollinations. In all cases, pollen tube penetration in the stigma was initially perceived as a wounding aggression. Then, as the pollen tubes grew in the style, a growing number of genes became specific to each pollen genotype. Functional classification analyses revealed sharp differences in the response to compatible and heterospecific pollinations. For instance, the former induced reactive oxygen species (ROS)-related genes while the latter affected genes associated to ethylene signaling. In contrast, incompatible pollination remained more akin to a wound response. Our analysis reveals that every pollination type produces a specific molecular signature generating diversified and specific responses at a distance in the ovary in preparation for fertilization.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".