MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390705387 · doi:10.1111/plb.13617

The first intron of <i>EIJ1</i> confers a specific response to wounding and herbivore stresses

2024· article· en· W4390705387 on OpenAlexaff
Miao Yin, Yu Li, Hailun Liu

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Biology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant-Microbe Interactions and Immunity
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Agriculture
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsBiologyHerbivoreArabidopsisArabidopsis thalianaBiotic stressIntronPlant defense against herbivoryBotanyCell biologyDefence mechanismsGeneGeneticsAbiotic stressMutant

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plants are constantly exposed to different kinds of biotic stress, such as herbivore attack and wounding. To deal with these stresses, plants have evolved sophisticated defence mechanisms to protect themselves. Previously, we found that EIJ1 (EDS1-interacting J protein 1) plays a negative regulatory role in plant disease resistance in Arabidopsis thaliana. Follow-up studies revealed that EIJ1 specifically responds to wounding and herbivore stresses. The expression of EIJ1 was specifically induced by wounding or herbivore stress, as demonstrated by similar results in EIJ1 protein assay. Interestingly, GUS staining found that the promoter of EIJ1 is not involved in the induction of expression under wounding stress. Instead, we identified the first intron of EIJ1 as a key factor in response to wounding stress. Deleting the first intron of EIJ1 resulted in a loss of response to wounding stress in plants. Our results broaden the role of EIJ1 in plant resistance to biotic stress and provide new insights into plant responses to biotic stress.

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)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant BiologySame topicPlant-Microbe Interactions and ImmunityFrench-language works237,207