MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Self‐Incompatibility

2022· other· en· W4309168188 on OpenAlexaff
Daphne R. Goring, Felipe Cruz‐García, Vernonica E. Franklin‐Tong

Bibliographic record

VenueEncyclopedia of Life Sciences · 2022
Typeother
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant Reproductive Biology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyPollenGynoeciumPollen tubeGeneticsOutcrossingInbreeding depressionSelfingPollinationBotanyStamenInbreedingPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Complex pollen–pistil (male–female) interactions play a decisive role in determining reproductive success following pollination. Self‐incompatibility (SI) is a genetically controlled mechanism to prevent self‐fertilisation, ensuring genetic diversity of offspring. Three SI systems have been well characterised at a molecular/cellular level; they utilise highly polymorphic, tightly linked pollen‐ and pistil‐expressed S ‐determinants. All three characterised SI systems have different S‐determinants and employ contrasting mechanisms to reject incompatible pollen. The Brassica and Papaver SI system operate using self‐recognition, while the S‐RNase SI system employs self‐/non‐self recognition. In Brassica , a receptor‐kinase ligand interaction, together with modifiers involving a ubiquitin degradation pathway which suppresses compatibility factors, results in the rejection of incompatible pollen. The Papaver SI system utilises a receptor–ligand type interaction that triggers a calcium‐dependent signalling network culminating in the programmed cell death of incompatible pollen. In the S‐RNase SI system, some form of detoxification of the ribonuclease activity takes place in compatible pollen tubes. Key Concepts Pollen–pistil interactions are pivotal in determining the reproductive outcomes in flowering plants. Self‐incompatibility (SI) is an important mechanism used by many flowering plants to prevent self‐fertilisation as enforced outcrossing ensures increased heterozygosity and this prevention of self‐seed set helps maintain genetic diversity and fitness. Self‐incompatibility loci are highly polymorphic and as many as 60 S ‐alleles are present at a single S ‐locus; this is comparable to the major histocompatibility complex in animals that allows self‐/non‐self discrimination by T cells. Three mechanistically distinct SI systems have been identified and as they employ different S‐determinants and mechanisms to prevent self‐fertilisation, this suggests that SI evolved independently at least three times, and probably many more times. In the Brassica SI system, the male S‐determinant is SCR/SP11, a small cysteine‐rich protein in the pollen coat, and the female S‐determinant, SRK, is a receptor kinase. In Brassica, following a ‘self’ pollen–stigma interaction, SCR/SP11 binds and activates SRK, triggering an intracellular signalling cascade in the stigma that suppress compatibility factors, resulting in the rejection of incompatible pollen In the Papaver SI system, the female S‐determinant, PrsS, is a small cysteine‐rich protein secreted by the stigma and the male S‐determinant is PrpS, a novel transmembrane protein. In Papaver, following a ‘self’ pollen–stigma interaction, a receptor–ligand type interaction between PrpS and PrsS takes place, triggering a calcium‐dependent signalling network culminating in the triggering of programmed cell death in incompatible pollen. In the S‐RNase SI system, the female S‐determinant is a ribonuclease: S‐RNase and the male S‐determinants are F‐box proteins. There are two conflicting models for how the S‐RNase SI system operates: both involve some form of detoxification of the S‐RNases in compatible pollen tubes, using either degradation by a ubiquitin pathway or compartmentalisation and selective release. Knowledge about the molecular basis of SI may provide opportunities for translational science and using SI for crop improvement may provide useful applications, for example to breed hybrid crops.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.246 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEncyclopedia of Life SciencesSame topicPlant Reproductive BiologyFrench-language works237,207