Gene Expression Analysis of Different Organs and Identification of AP2 Transcription Factors in Flax (Linum usitatissimum L.)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L.) is an important oilseed crop widely cultivated for its oil and fiber. This study conducted transcriptome analysis to analyze the gene expression profiles of roots, leaves, stamens, pistils, and fruits in the flax cultivar Longya10. A total of 43,471 genes were detected in the RNA-seq data, with 34,497 genes showing differential expression levels between different organs. Gene expression patterns varied across different organs, with differences observed in expression-regulating genes within specific organs. However, 23,448 genes were found to be commonly expressed across all organs. Further analysis revealed organ-specific gene expressions, with 236, 690, 544, 909, and 1212 genes identified in pistils, fruits, leaves, roots, and stamens, respectively. Gene Ontology (GO) enrichment analysis was performed on these organ-specific genes, and significant enrichment was observed in various biological processes, cellular components, and molecular functions, providing new insights for the specific growth patterns of flax organs. Furthermore, we investigated the expression differences of AP2 transcription factors in various tissues and organs of Longya10. We identified 96 AP2 genes that were differentially expressed in different organs and annotated them into various biological pathways. Our results suggest that AP2 transcription factors may play important roles in regulating the growth and development of flax organs including stress response. In summary, our study provides a comprehensive analysis of gene expression patterns in different organs and tissues of flax plant and identifies potential critical regulators of flax organ growth and development. These findings contribute to a better understanding of the molecular mechanisms underlying flax organ development and may have important implications for the genetic improvement of flax 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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".