MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394124567 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.20070783

Additional file 1 of Combined transcriptome and metabolome analysis of Nerium indicum L. elaborates the key pathways that are activated in response to witches’ broom disease

2022· dataset· en· W4394124567 on OpenAlexaff
Shengjie Wang, Shengkun Wang, Ming Li, Yuhang Su, Zhan Sun, Haibin Ma

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2022
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and fungal interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBroomMetabolomeTranscriptomeKey (lock)BiologyBotanyComputational biologyMetabolomicsBioinformaticsGeneticsGeneGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Additional file 1: Supplementary Table 1. Summary of transcriptome sequencing of infected and non-infected Nerium indicum L. tissues. Supplementary Table 2. Differential expression of genes between infected (NOWP) and non-infected (NOHP) N. indicum phloem. Supplementary Table 3. Differential expression of genes between infected (NOWS) and non-infected (NOHS) N. indicum stem. Supplementary Table 4. List of differentially expressed genes that were enriched in specific pathways in WBD infected N. indicum phloem (NOWP) and stem tip (NOWS) as compared to controls i.e., NOHP and NOHS, respectively. Supplementary Table 5. Details of the differentially accumulated metabolites between infected (NOWP) and non-infected (NOHP) N. indicum phloem. Supplementary Table 6. Details of the differentially accumulated metabolites between infected (NOWS) and non-infected (NOHS) N. indicum stem tip. Supplementary Table 7. Pathway specific differential accumulation of metabolites in infected N. indicum phloem and stem as compared to non-infected tissues.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.256
Threshold uncertainty score0.857

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2560.082

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicPlant and fungal interactionsFrench-language works237,207