<i>Physcomitrium (Physcomitrella) patens</i> endo‐glucanase 16 is involved in the cell wall development of young tissue
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plants maintain large repertoires of carbohydrate-active enzymes (CAZymes)-comprising between 3% and 10% of their genomes-to synthesize, modify, and degrade the polysaccharide components of the cell wall. We recently identified a unique group of plant endo-glucanases from Glycoside Hydrolase Family 16, viz. EG16 orthologs, which constitute a sister clade to the well-known XYLOGLUCAN ENDO-TRANSGLYCOSYLASE/HYDROLASE (XTH) gene products. Biochemical analysis of EG16 orthologs from poplar (Populus trichocarpa), grapevine (Vitis vinifera), and spreading earthmoss (Physcomitrium patens) has demonstrated that these endo-glucanases are distinctly active on cell wall matrix glycans, mixed-linkage β(1,3);β(1,4)-glucan and xyloglucan (XyG), and that enzyme structure and specificity is highly conserved across diverse plant lineages. However, the physiological role of EG16 orthologs in any species is presently unknown. To shed light on EG16 function in vivo, here we performed reverse genetics and protein localization analyses of the single EG16 ortholog in the model moss P. patens, where this gene is highly expressed in young, expanding tissues, particularly in protonema. Surprisingly, deletion of the PpEG16 gene by homologous recombination led to an increase in growth, as well as accelerated senescence. Notably, the PpEG16 protein was shown to co-localize with XyG in the cell wall of protonema tissue, specifically at cell tips, despite lacking a secretion signal peptide. Although the precise biological role of EG16 orthologs remains elusive, our results implicate these highly conserved glycoside hydrolases in cell wall polysaccharide remodeling and recycling. We anticipate that these foundational results will inform future studies on EG16 function across plant lineages.
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) | 0.001 | 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".