MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3016343849 · doi:10.1002/dvdy.181

<scp>GAL4</scp> / <scp>GFP enhancer‐trap</scp> lines for identification and manipulation of cells and tissues in developing Arabidopsis leaves

2020· article· en· W3016343849 on OpenAlexafffund
Brindhi Amalraj, Priyanka Govindaraju, Anmol Krishna, Dhruv Lavania, Nguyễn Mạnh Linh, Sree Janani Ravichandran, Enrico Scarpella

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Dynamics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Molecular Biology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEnhancer trapBiologyArabidopsisEnhancerGreen fluorescent proteinCell biologyTrap (plumbing)Cell cultureIdentification (biology)Computational biologyGeneGene expressionGeneticsBotanyMutantPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Understanding developmental processes requires the unambiguous identification of cells and tissues, and the selective manipulation of the properties of those cells and tissues. Both requirements can most efficiently be satisfied through the use of GAL4/GFP enhancer-trap lines. No such lines, however, have been characterized for the study of early leaf development in the Columbia-0 reference genotype of Arabidopsis. RESULTS: Here we address this limitation by identifying and characterizing a set of GAL4/GFP enhancer-trap lines in the Columbia-0 background for the specific labeling of cells and tissues during early leaf development, and for the targeted expression of genes of interest in those cells and tissues. CONCLUSIONS: By using one line in our set to address outstanding questions in leaf vein patterning, we show that these lines can be used to address key questions in plant developmental biology.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.659
Threshold uncertainty score0.340

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmental DynamicsSame topicPlant Molecular Biology ResearchFrench-language works237,207