Distinct mechanisms of plant immune resilience revealed by natural variation in warm temperature-modulated disease resistance among <i>Arabidopsis</i> accessions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Elevated temperature suppresses production of the key plant defence hormone salicylic acid (SA). Heat-mediated SA suppression and resulting plant vulnerability are due to downregulated expression of CALMODULIN BINDING PROTEIN 60-LIKE G ( CBP60g ) and SYSTEMIC ACQUIRED RESISTANCE DEFICIENT 1 ( SARD1 ), which encode master regulators of plant immunity. However, previous studies in Arabidopsis thaliana plants have primarily focused on the accession Columbia-0 (Col-0), while the mechanisms governing the intraspecific variation in Arabidopsis immunity under elevated temperature have remained unknown. Here we show that BASIC HELIX LOOP HELIX 059 (bHLH059), a thermosensitive SA regulator at non-stress temperatures, does not regulate immune suppression under warmer temperatures. In agreement, temperature-resilient and -sensitive Arabidopsis accessions based on disease resistance to the bacterial pathogen Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato ( Pst ) DC3000 did not correlate with bHLH059 sequence polymorphisms. Instead, we found that different temperature-resilient accessions exhibit varying CBP60g and SARD1 expression profiles, potentially revealing both CBP60g/SARD1 -dependent and independent mechanisms of plant immune resilience to warming temperature. Collectively, this study has unveiled the intraspecific diversity of Arabidopsis immune responses under warm temperatures. Our dissection of mechanisms underlying temperature-modulated plant immunity could aid in predicting plant responses to climate change and provide foundational knowledge for climate-resilient crop engineering.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".