MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200565265 · doi:10.1111/pce.14249

ADH2/GSNOR1 is a key player in limiting genotoxic damage mediated by formaldehyde and UV‐B in <i>Arabidopsis</i>

2021· article· en· W4200565265 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Yu Wang, Jinzheng Wang, Qiang Lv, Yikun He

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Cell & Environment · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLight effects on plants
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersWuhan UniversityChinese Academy of SciencesInstitute of GeneticsNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsArabidopsisGenome instabilityDNA damageMutantArabidopsis thalianaDNAFormaldehyde dehydrogenaseBiologyCell biologyChemistryGeneticsEnzymeBiochemistryGeneNAD+ kinase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Maintenance of genome stability is an essential requirement for all living organisms. Formaldehyde and UV-B irradiation cause DNA damage and affect genome stability, growth and development, but the interplay between these two genotoxic factors is poorly understood in plants. We show that Arabidopsis adh2/gsnor1 mutant, which lacks alcohol dehydrogenase 2/S-nitrosoglutathione reductase 1 (ADH2/GSNOR1), are hypersensitive to low fluence UV-B irradiation or UV-B irradiation-mimetic chemicals. Although the ADH2/GSNOR1 enzyme can act on different substrates, notably on S-hydroxymethylglutathione (HMG) and S-nitrosoglutathione (GSNO), our study provides several lines of evidence that the sensitivity of gsnor1 to UV-B is caused mainly by UV-B-induced formaldehyde accumulation rather than other factors such as alteration of the GSNO concentration. Our results demonstrate an interplay between formaldehyde and UV-B that exacerbates genome instability, leading to severe DNA damage and impaired growth and development in Arabidopsis, and show that ADH2/GSNOR1 is a key player in combating these effects.

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)0.000
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 score0.368
Threshold uncertainty score0.591

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.162
Teacher spread0.154 · 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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant Cell & EnvironmentSame topicLight effects on plantsFrench-language works237,207