MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3182723620 · doi:10.1111/pce.14146

Plasticity of rosette size in response to nitrogen availability is controlled by an <scp>RCC1</scp>‐family protein

2021· article· en· W3182723620 on OpenAlexaff
Gustavo Turqueto Duarte, Prashant Kumar Pandey, Neha Vaid, Saleh Alseekh, Alisdair R. Fernie, Zoran Nikoloski, Roosa A. E. Laitinen

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Cell & Environment · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant nutrient uptake and metabolism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryNational Research Council CanadaSaskatchewan Research Council (Canada)
FundersHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeMax-Planck-GesellschaftDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftEuropean Commission
KeywordsRosette (schizont appearance)NitrogenChemistryPlasticityCell biologyBiologyBiophysicsMaterials scienceImmunologyComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nitrogen (N) is fundamental to plant growth, development and yield. Genes underlying N utilization and assimilation are well-characterized, but mechanisms underpinning plasticity of different phenotypes in response to N remain elusive. Here, using Arabidopsis thaliana accessions, we dissected the genetic architecture of plasticity in early and late rosette diameter, flowering time and yield, in response to three levels of N in the soil. Furthermore, we found that the plasticity in levels of primary metabolites were related with the plasticities of the studied traits. Genome-wide association analysis identified three significant associations for phenotypic plasticity, one for early rosette diameter and two for flowering time. We confirmed that the gene At1g19880, hereafter named as PLASTICITY OF ROSETTE TO NITROGEN 1 (PROTON1), encoding for a regulator of chromatin condensation 1 (RCC1) family protein, conferred plasticity of rosette diameter in response to N. Treatment of PROTON1 T-DNA line with salt implied that the reduced plasticity of early rosette diameter was not a general growth response to stress. We further showed that plasticities of growth and flowering-related traits differed between environmental cues, indicating decoupled genetic programs regulating these traits. Our findings provide a prospective to identify genes that stabilize performance under fluctuating environments.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.351
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.167 · 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

Citations16
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant Cell & EnvironmentSame topicPlant nutrient uptake and metabolismFrench-language works237,207