MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3109774046 · doi:10.1139/gen-2020-0110

The neonicotinoid insecticide thiamethoxam enhances expression of stress-response genes in <i>Zea mays</i> in an environmentally specific pattern

2020· article· en· W3109774046 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Megan House, Clarence J. Swanton, Lewis Lukens

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect and Pesticide Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyThiamethoxamGeneBiotic stressAbiotic stressGeneticsAbiotic componentCell biologyBotanyPesticideImidaclopridAgronomyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent studies indicate that thiamethoxam (TMX), a neonicotinoid insecticide, can affect plant responses to environmental stressors, such as neighboring weeds. The molecular mechanisms behind both stable and environmentally specific responses to TMX likely involve genes related to defense and stress responses. We investigated the effect of a TMX seed treatment on global gene expression in maize coleoptiles both under normal conditions and under low ratio red to far-red (R:FR) light stress induced by the presence of neighboring plants. The neighboring plant treatment upregulated genes involved in biotic and abiotic stress responses and affected specific photosynthesis and cell-growth related genes. Low R:FR light may enhance maize resistance to herbivores and pathogens. TMX appears to compromise resistance. The TMX treatment stably repressed many genes that encode proteins involved in biotic stress responses, as well as cell-growth genes. Notably, TMX effects on many genes' expression were conditional on the environment. In response to low R:FR, plants treated with TMX engage genes in the JA pathway, as well as other stress-related response pathways. Neighboring weeds may condition TMX-treated plants to become more stress tolerant.

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)0.001
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 score0.686
Threshold uncertainty score0.504

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 venueGenomeSame topicInsect and Pesticide ResearchFrench-language works237,207