Genome-wide identification of Fagus sylvatica aquaporins and their comparative spring and summer expression profiles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Key message A total of 45 aquaporins was identified in Fagus sylvatica, 35 of which were differentially expressed in spring and summer in the leaves, phloem and xylem of 11-year-old trees. Abstract European beech (Fagus sylvatica) has been widely studied in terms of its water relations and local adaptation. However, to date, the underlying basis conferring adaptation to differences in water availability are unknown. Therefore, we examined the expression of aquaporins in trees of four different beech provenances representing the southern and northern range margins, as well as core populations, grown in a common garden. We sampled their xylem, phloem and leaf tissue, when leaves had fully expanded, and in late summer. A total of 45 aquaporin isoforms were identified in the beech genome, of which 35 were detected across all sampled tissues. In our phylogenetic analysis, beech aquaporins clustered into the five subfamilies found in other woody species. Members of the plasma membrane intrinsic protein subfamily generally displayed the highest levels of expression, followed by tonoplast intrinsic proteins. Isoforms of the remaining subfamilies, Noduline-26-like intrinsic proteins, small basic intrinsic proteins and uncharacterised intrinsic proteins, were expressed at very low to moderate levels. The expression of most isoforms was stable or declined from spring to summer. Leaves followed a different expression profile from that of vascular tissues, whereas both phloem and xylem were found to express the same FsMIPs. Tissue-specific aquaporin expression was very similar amongst the four beech provenances, indicating that there is no inherent difference in the capability of these provenances to regulate aquaporin activity. The general decrease in FsMIP expression toward the end of the growing period indicates that aquaporins are involved in tree water relations and growth.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".