MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4284975276 · doi:10.1038/s42003-022-03646-9

Lilac (Syringa oblata) genome provides insights into its evolution and molecular mechanism of petal color change

2022· article· en· W4284975276 on OpenAlexaff
Bo Ma, Jing Wu, Tian‐Le Shi, Yunyao Yang, Wenbo Wang, Yi Zheng, Shuchai Su, Yuncong Yao, Wenbo Xue, Ilga Porth, Yousry A. El‐Kassaby, Pingsheng Leng, Zenghui Hu, Jian‐Feng Mao

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications Biology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant Gene Expression Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordslilacPetalGenomeBiologyOleaceaeBotanyGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Color change during flower opening is common; however, little is understood on the biochemical and molecular basis related. Lilac (Syringa oblata), a well-known woody ornamental plant with obvious petal color changes, is an ideal model. Here, we presented chromosome-scale genome assembly for lilac, resolved the flavonoids metabolism, and identified key genes and potential regulatory networks related to petal color change. The genome assembly is 1.05 Gb anchored onto 23 chromosomes, with a BUSCO score of 96.6%. Whole-genome duplication (WGD) event shared within Oleaceae was revealed. Metabolome quantification identified delphinidin-3-O-rutinoside (Dp3Ru) and cyanidin-3-O-rutinoside (Cy3Ru) as the major pigments; gene co-expression networks indicated WRKY an essential regulation factor at the early flowering stage, ERF more important in the color transition period (from violet to light nearly white), while the MBW complex participated in the entire process. Our results provide a foundation for functional study and molecular breeding in lilac.

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 score0.298
Threshold uncertainty score0.484

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 science0.0010.002
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations38
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunications BiologySame topicPlant Gene Expression AnalysisFrench-language works237,207