MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4389346248 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3690828/v1

Gγ-protein GS3 function downstream of OsmiR396/GS2 module to regulate grain size in rice

2023· preprint· en· W4389346248 on OpenAlexaff
Lin Zhu, Yanjie Shen, Zhengyan Dai, Xuexia Miao, Zhenying Shi

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Biological Sciences
FundersState Key Laboratory of Hybrid RiceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsBiologyQuantitative trait locusGrain sizeGeneTraitGrain yieldCropGeneticsAgronomyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Rice is one of the main crops in the world which provides food for more than one half world population. Grain size is tightly associated with grain weight, one of the three components determining yield in rice. Quite a few grain size determining quantitative trait loci (QTLs) have been identified, and several grain size-regulating signaling pathways been formed. Here, we showed that in the MIM396 plants, expression of GS3 gene was influenced. Through various biochemical assays, we proved that the miR396/GS2 module could directly regulate the Gg-protein GS3 to regulate grain size. Moreover, tight genetic association existed between miR396/GS2 and GS3. Moreover, other G-protein factors might also be connected with miR396/GS2 module, and thus factors from different pathways form a network to regulate grain size. Therefore, elucidation of these crosstalk would not only further our understanding of the molecular mechanism of grain size regulation, but also help guide modern crop breeding.

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)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals→French-language works237,207→