MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4296838830 · doi:10.3389/fpls.2022.981684

ZAR1: Guardian of plant kinases

2022· review· en· W4296838830 on OpenAlexafffund
Clare Breit-McNally, Bradley Laflamme, Racquel A. Singh, Darrell Desveaux, David S. Guttman

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Plant Science · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant-Microbe Interactions and Immunity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEffectorBiologyKinaseCell biologyComputational biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A key facet of innate immunity in plants entails the recognition of pathogen "effector" virulence proteins by host Nucleotide-Binding Leucine-Rich Repeat Receptors (NLRs). Among characterized NLRs, the broadly conserved ZAR1 NLR is particularly remarkable due to its capacity to recognize at least six distinct families of effectors from at least two bacterial genera. This expanded recognition spectrum is conferred through interactions between ZAR1 and a dynamic network of two families of Receptor-Like Cytoplasmic Kinases (RLCKs): ZED1-Related Kinases (ZRKs) and PBS1-Like Kinases (PBLs). In this review, we survey the history of functional studies on ZAR1, with an emphasis on how the ZAR1-RLCK network functions to trap diverse effectors. We discuss 1) the dynamics of the ZAR1-associated RLCK network; 2) the specificity between ZRKs and PBLs; and 3) the specificity between effectors and the RLCK network. We posit that the shared protein fold of kinases and the switch-like properties of their interactions make them ideal effector sensors, enabling ZAR1 to act as a broad spectrum guardian of host kinases.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations14
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Plant ScienceSame topicPlant-Microbe Interactions and ImmunityFrench-language works237,207