MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3088570016 · doi:10.3390/ijms21197011

A Review of Starch Biosynthesis in Relation to the Building Block-Backbone Model

2020· review· en· W3088570016 on OpenAlexaff
Ian J. Tetlow, Eric Bertoft

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Molecular Sciences · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFood composition and properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStarchAmyloplastGranule (geology)ChemistryBiochemistryPlastidCarbohydrateBiosynthesisBiologyGeneChloroplast

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Starch is a water-insoluble polymer of glucose synthesized as discrete granules inside the stroma of plastids in plant cells. Starch reserves provide a source of carbohydrate for immediate growth and development, and act as long term carbon stores in endosperms and seed tissues for growth of the next generation, making starch of huge agricultural importance. The starch granule has a highly complex hierarchical structure arising from the combined actions of a large array of enzymes as well as physicochemical self-assembly mechanisms. Understanding the precise nature of granule architecture, and how both biological and abiotic factors determine this structure is of both fundamental and practical importance. This review outlines current knowledge of granule architecture and the starch biosynthesis pathway in relation to the building block-backbone model of starch structure. We highlight the gaps in our knowledge in relation to our understanding of the structure and synthesis of starch, and argue that the building block-backbone model takes accurate account of both structural and biochemical data.

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)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.299 · 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

Citations132
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Molecular SciencesSame topicFood composition and propertiesFrench-language works237,207