Impact of in vitro phytohormone treatments on the metabolome of the leafy liverwort Radula complanata (L.) Dumort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Liverworts are a group of non-vascular plants that possess unique metabolism not found in other plants. Many liverwort metabolites have interesting structural and biochemical characteristics, however the fluctuations of these metabolites in response to stressors is largely unknown. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the metabolic stress-response of the leafy liverwort Radula complanata. METHODS: Five phytohormones were applied exogenously to in vitro cultured R. complanata and an untargeted metabolomic analysis was conducted. Compound classification and identification was performed with CANOPUS and SIRIUS while statistical analyses including PCA, ANOVA, and variable selection using BORUTA were conducted to identify metabolic shifts. RESULTS: It was found that R. complanata was predominantly composed of carboxylic acids and derivatives, followed by benzene and substituted derivatives, fatty acyls, organooxygen compounds, prenol lipids, and flavonoids. The PCA revealed that samples grouped based on the type of hormone applied, and the variable selection using BORUTA (Random Forest) revealed 71 identified and/or classified features that fluctuated with phytohormone application. The stress-response treatments largely reduced the production of the selected primary metabolites while the growth treatments resulted in increased production of these compounds. 4-(3-Methyl-2-butenyl)-5-phenethylbenzene-1,3-diol was identified as a biomarker for the growth treatments while GDP-hexose was identified as a biomarker for the stress-response treatments. CONCLUSION: Exogenous phytohormone application caused clear metabolic shifts in Radula complanata that deviate from the responses of vascular plants. Further identification of the selected metabolite features can reveal metabolic biomarkers unique to liverworts and provide more insight into liverwort stress responses.
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".