Plants Metabolome Study: Emerging Tools and Techniques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Metabolomics is now considered to be a wide-ranging, sensitive and practical approach to acquire useful information on the composition of a metabolite pool present in any organism, including plants. Investigating metabolomic regulation in plants is essential to understand their adaptation, acclimation and defense response to environmental stresses through the production of numerous metabolites. Moreover, metabolomics can be easily applied for the phenotyping of plants; and thus, it has great potential to be used in molecular breeding and genome editing programs to develop superior next generation crops. This review describes the recent analytical tools and techniques available to study plants metabolome, along with their significance of sample preparation using targeted and non-targeted method. Advanced analytical tools, like gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS), liquid chromatography mass-spectroscopy (LC-MS), capillary electrophoresis-mass spectrometry (CE-MS), fourier transform ion cyclotron resonance-mass spectrometry (FTICR-MS) and matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization (MALDI) have speed up metabolic profiling in plants. Further, we deliver a complete overview of bioinformatics tools and plant metabolome database that can be utilized to advance our knowledge to plant biology.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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.
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".