Multiple indole glucosinolates and myrosinases defend Arabidopsis against <i>Tetranychus urticae</i> herbivory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Arabidopsis defenses against herbivores are regulated by the jasmonate hormonal signaling pathway, which leads to the production of a plethora of defense compounds, including tryptophan-derived metabolites produced through CYP79B2/CYP79B3. Jasmonate signaling and CYP79B2/CYP79B3 limit Arabidopsis infestation by the generalist herbivore two-spotted spider mite, Tetranychus urticae . However, the phytochemicals responsible for Arabidopsis protection against T. urticae are unknown. Here, using Arabidopsis mutants that disrupt metabolic pathways downstream of CYP79B2/CYP79B3, and synthetic indole glucosinolates, we identified phytochemicals involved in the defense against T. urticae . We show that Trp-derived metabolites depending on CYP71A12 and CYP71A13 are not affecting mite herbivory. Instead, the supplementation of cyp79b2 cyp79b3 mutant leaves with the 3-indolylmethyl glucosinolate and its derived metabolites demonstrated that the indole glucosinolate pathway is sufficient to assure CYP79B2/CYP79B3-mediated defenses against T. urticae . We demonstrate that three indole glucosinolates can limit T. urticae herbivory, but that they have to be processed by the myrosinases to hinder T. urticae oviposition. Finally, the supplementation of the mutant myc2 myc3 myc4 with indole glucosinolates indicated that the transcription factors MYC2/MYC3/MYC4 induce additional indole glucosinolate-independent defenses that control T. urticae herbivory. Together, these results reveal the complexity of Arabidopsis defenses against T. urticae that rely on multiple indole glucosinolates, specific myrosinases, and additional MYC2/MYC3/MYC4-dependent defenses. One sentence summary Three indole glucosinolates and the myrosinases TGG1/TGG2 help protect Arabidopsis thaliana against the herbivory of the two-spotted spider mite Tetranychus urticae .
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".