Production of yellow‐flowered gentian plants by genetic engineering of betaxanthin pigments
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Genetic engineering of flower color provides biotechnological products such as blue carnations or roses by accumulating delphinidin‐based anthocyanins not naturally existing in these plant species. Betalains are another class of pigments that in plants are only synthesized in the order Caryophyllales. Although they have been engineered in several plant species, especially red‐violet betacyanins, the yellow betaxanthins have yet to be engineered in ornamental plants. We attempted to produce yellow‐flowered gentians by genetic engineering of betaxanthin pigments. First, white‐flowered gentian lines were produced by knocking out the dihydroflavonol 4‐reductase ( DFR ) gene using CRISPR/Cas9‐mediated genome editing. Beta vulgaris BvCYP76AD6 and Mirabilis jalapa MjDOD , driven by gentian petal‐specific promoters, flavonoid 3′,5′‐hydroxylase ( F3′5′H ) and anthocyanin 5,3′‐aromatic acyltransferase ( AT ), respectively, were transformed into the above DFR ‐knockout white‐flowered line; the resultant gentian plants had vivid yellow flowers. Expression analysis and pigment analysis revealed petal‐specific expression and accumulation of seven known betaxanthins in their petals to c. 0.06–0.08 μmol g FW −1 . Genetic engineering of vivid yellow‐flowered plants can be achieved by combining genome editing and a suitable expression of betaxanthin‐biosynthetic genes in ornamental plants.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it