Auxin analog-induced Ca2+ signaling is independent of inhibition of endosomal aggregation in Arabidopsis roots
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Much of what we know about the role of auxin in plant development derives from exogenous manipulations of auxin distribution and signaling, using inhibitors, auxins, and auxin analogs. In this context, synthetic auxin analogs, such as 1-naphthalene acetic acid (1-NAA), are often favored over the endogenous auxin, indole-3-acetic acid (IAA), in part due to their higher stability. While such auxin analogs have proven instrumental in revealing the various faces of auxin, they display in some cases bioactivities distinct from IAA. Here, we focused on the effect of auxin analogs on the accumulation of PIN proteins in brefeldin A-sensitive endosomal aggregations (BFA bodies), and correlation with the ability to elicit Ca2+ responses. For a set of commonly used auxin analogs, we evaluated if auxin analog-induced Ca2+ signaling inhibits PIN accumulation. Not all auxin analogs elicited a Ca2+ response, and their differential ability to elicit Ca2+ responses correlated partially with their ability to inhibit BFA-body formation. However, in tir1/afb and cngc14, 1-NAA-induced Ca2+ signaling was strongly impaired, yet 1-NAA still could inhibit PIN accumulation in BFA bodies. This demonstrates that TIR1/AFB-CNGC14-dependent Ca2+ signaling does not inhibit BFA body formation in Arabidopsis roots.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".