Multiple indole glucosinolates and myrosinases defend Arabidopsis against <i>Tetranychus urticae</i> herbivory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) defenses against herbivores are regulated by the jasmonate (JA) hormonal signaling pathway, which leads to the production of a plethora of defense compounds. Arabidopsis defense compounds include tryptophan-derived metabolites, which 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, we used Arabidopsis mutants disrupted in the synthesis of tryptophan-derived secondary metabolites to identify phytochemicals involved in the defense against T. urticae. We show that of the three tryptophan-dependent pathways found in Arabidopsis, the indole glucosinolate (IG) pathway is necessary and sufficient to assure tryptophan-mediated defense against T. urticae. We demonstrate that all three IGs can limit T. urticae herbivory, but that they must be processed by myrosinases to hinder T. urticae oviposition. Putative IG breakdown products were detected in mite-infested leaves, suggesting in planta processing by myrosinases. Finally, we demonstrate that besides IGs, there are additional JA-regulated defenses that control T. urticae herbivory. Together, our results reveal the complexity of Arabidopsis defenses against T. urticae that rely on multiple IGs, specific myrosinases, and additional JA-dependent defenses.
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".