MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402292926 · doi:10.1139/cjb-2024-0027

Tissue-specific expression of HCN and its metabolic precursors in <i>Trifolium repens</i>

2024· article· en· W4402292926 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Keerath Bhachu, James S. Santangelo, Marc T. J. Johnson, Hind Emad Fadoul

Bibliographic record

VenueBotany · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGABA and Rice Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrifolium repensBiologyRepensBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cyanogenesis, the release of hydrogen cyanide (HCN), is governed by two loci, Ac and Li, in white clover ( Trifolium repens L.). Ac encodes a three gene region that regulates cyanogenic glucoside production, while Li encodes linamarase that hydrolyzes cyanogenic glucosides to produce HCN. We examined Ac and Li expression in leaf, floral, and root tissues of cyanogenic and acyanogenic plants, complemented by gene expression analysis, to understand tissue-specific expression of HCN metabolism. Ac metabolic expression was present in leaves, absent in roots, and rare in flowers. Li metabolic expression in leaves perfectly correlated with that in flowers but was present in roots regardless of linamarase presence in leaves, suggesting spatial enzyme expression variation due to a homologous gene copy. HCN expression in flowers was infrequently expressed at low concentrations in plants with functional Ac and Li. Gene expression analysis confirmed some tissue-specific expression patterns and also suggested more complex molecular regulation than previously described. This study provides the first detailed examination of cyanogenesis tissue specificity in white clover, a plant of agriculture significance. The varied expression of cyanogenic secondary metabolites across tissues indicates the need for research into how white clover regulates its defenses to conserve resources.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.519
Threshold uncertainty score0.252

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBotanySame topicGABA and Rice ResearchFrench-language works237,207