MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385449965 · doi:10.5376/ijh.2023.13.0003

Cloning and Expression Pattern Analysis of Flowering Related Gene

2023· article· en· W4385449965 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yubo Shi, Chengzhong Wang, Yan Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Horticulture · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant Reproductive Biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloning (programming)BiologyGeneGeneticsExpression (computer science)Computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A core fragment highly homologous with VERNALIZATION INSENSITIVE 3(VIN3) was obtained on the basis of preliminary Agapanthus praecox ssp.Orientalis transcriptome sequencing results.The full length sequence of cDNA, VIN3 gene of A. praecox was gained by the RACE method, which was named ApVIN3 with the accession number of KJ472789.The results of sequence analysis showed that the ApVIN3 gene length of cDNA was 1 943 bp, which contained an open reading frame of 1 680 bp, 559 encoding amino acids, untranslated region (UTR) 5' and 3' with the length of 88 bp and 175 bp, respectively.ApVIN3 encoding is a PHD-finger protein with a conserved sequence structure of C4HC3 (cys4-His-cys3), which is highly similar to the VIN3 protein of Brachypodium distachyum (L.) Beauv (XP_003573553.1).Quantitative Real-time PCR show: The regulation of gene expression in quantity by temperature in Agapanthus africanus Hoffmgg.shoot apex, with prolonging the time of low temperature rising.This gene may play an important role in the process of brucella induction, and its function and regulation mechanism can be studied deeply.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of HorticultureSame topicPlant Reproductive BiologyFrench-language works237,207