MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3080498445 · doi:10.3390/genes11090995

Beyond Trees: Regulons and Regulatory Motif Characterization

2020· review· en· W3080498445 on OpenAlexafffund
Xuhua Xia

Bibliographic record

VenueGenes · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Molecular Biology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRegulonTranscription factorBiologyIn silicoGeneticsGeneComputational biologyRegulation of gene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Trees and their seeds regulate their germination, growth, and reproduction in response to environmental stimuli. These stimuli, through signal transduction, trigger transcription factors that alter the expression of various genes leading to the unfolding of the genetic program. A regulon is conceptually defined as a set of target genes regulated by a transcription factor by physically binding to regulatory motifs to accomplish a specific biological function, such as the CO-FT regulon for flowering timing and fall growth cessation in trees. Only with a clear characterization of regulatory motifs, can candidate target genes be experimentally validated, but motif characterization represents the weakest feature of regulon research, especially in tree genetics. I review here relevant experimental and bioinformatics approaches in characterizing transcription factors and their binding sites, outline problems in tree regulon research, and demonstrate how transcription factor databases can be effectively used to aid the characterization of tree regulons.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenesSame topicPlant Molecular Biology ResearchFrench-language works237,207