Importance of inositols and their derivatives in cowpea under root dehydration: An omics perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work presents a robust analysis of the inositols (INSs) and raffinose family oligosaccharides (RFOs) pathways, using genomic and transcriptomic tools in cowpea under root dehydration. Nineteen (~70%) of the 26 scrutinized enzymes presented transcriptional up-regulation in at least one treatment time. The transcriptional orchestration allowed categorization of the analyzed enzymes as time-independent (those showing the same regulation throughout the assay) and time-dependent (those showing different transcriptional regulation over time). It is suggested that up-regulated time-independent enzymes (INSs: myo-inositol oxygenase, inositol-tetrakisphosphate 1-kinase 3, phosphatidylinositol 4-phosphate 5-kinase 4-like, 1-phosphatidylinositol-3-phosphate 5-kinase, phosphoinositide phospholipase C, and non-specific phospholipase C; RFOs: α-galactosidase, invertase, and raffinose synthase) actively participate in the reorganization of cowpea molecular physiology under the applied stress. In turn, time-dependent enzymes, especially those up-regulated in some of the treatment times (INSs: inositol-pentakisphosphate 2-kinase, phosphatidylinositol 4-kinase, phosphatidylinositol synthase, multiple inositol polyphosphate phosphatase 1, methylmalonate-semialdehyde dehydrogenase, triosephosphate isomerase, myo-inositol-3-phosphate synthase, phosphatidylinositol 3,4,5-trisphosphate 3-phosphatase and protein-tyrosine-phosphatase, and phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase; RFOs: galactinol synthase) seem to participate in fine-tuning of the molecular physiology, helping the cowpea plants to acclimatize under dehydration stress. Not all loci encoding the studied enzymes were expressed during the assay; most of the expressed ones exhibited a variable transcriptional profile in the different treatment times. Genes of the INSs and RFOs pathways showed high orthology with analyzed Phaseoleae members, suggesting a relevant role within this legume group. Regarding the promoter regions of INSs and RFOs genes, some bona fide cis-regulatory elements were identified in association with seven transcription factor families (AP2-EFR, Dof-type, MADS-box, bZIP, CPP, ZF-HD, and GATA-type). Members of INSs and RFOs pathways potentially participate in other processes regulated by these proteins in cowpea.
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".