MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2974208697 · doi:10.1139/cjps-2018-0154

Constitutive expression of chrysanthemum <i>CmBBX29</i> delays flowering time in transgenic <i>Arabidopsis</i>

2019· article· en· W2974208697 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hong Chen, Fei Huang, Yanan Liu, Peilei Cheng, Zhiyong Guan, Weimin Fang, Sumei Chen, Fadi Chen, Jiafu Jiang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Molecular Biology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science Fund for Distinguished Young ScholarsChinese Academy of SciencesNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsBiologyArabidopsisChrysanthemum morifoliumTranscription factorArabidopsis thalianaLocus (genetics)GeneLeafyTransgeneFlowering Locus CTranscription (linguistics)photoperiodismGenetically modified cropsGeneticsBotanyMutant

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BBX transcription factors are known to regulate the flowering time and the plant response to various abiotic stresses, but their functions in chrysanthemum have yet to be thoroughly explored. Here, a chrysanthemum homolog of the Arabidopsis thaliana gene AtBBX29 was isolated and characterized. The gene was transcribed in various plant organs but most strongly in the root and in the ligulate flowers. Its temporal pattern of transcription mirrored that of CmCO, the chrysanthemum homolog of the key flowering regulator CONSTANS (CO). Its constitutive expression in A. thaliana induced a delay to flowering, suppressing the transcription of FLOWERING LOCUS T (FT), SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION OF CONSTANS 1 (SOC1), LEAFY (LFY), and APETALA 1 (AP1), while promoting that of FLOWERING LOCUS C (FLC). Our results indicate that CmBBX29 can regulate flowering time in A. thaliana by the integration of FLC and the photoperiod pathway.

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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant Science→Same topicPlant Molecular Biology Research→French-language works237,207→