MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403044867 · doi:10.1016/j.isci.2024.111092

Identification and characterization of MADS-box gene family in flax, Linum usitatissimum L. and its role under abiotic stress

2024· article· en· W4403044867 on OpenAlexaff
Jianyu Lu, Hanlu Wu, David Michael Pitt, Xin‐Yang Liu, Xixia Song, Hongmei Yuan, Yuntao Ma, Shuyao Li, Zhenyuan Zang, Jun Zhang, Michael K. Deyholos, Jian Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueiScience · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Molecular Biology Research
Canadian institutionsOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersJiangsu Provincial Department of Human Resources and Social SecurityJilin Agricultural University
KeywordsLinumMADS-boxAbiotic stressIdentification (biology)GeneBiologyAbiotic componentGene familyGeneticsBotanyArabidopsisGene expressionEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary MADS-box transcription factors play critical roles in plant development and stress responses. In this study, we identified 114 LuMADS genes in flax (Linum usitatissimum L.) and analyzed their phylogenetic relationships, gene structure, conserved motifs, miRNA targets, and expression patterns. We classified 45 LuMADS proteins as type I and 69 as type II, further subdivided into 11 subfamilies. Notably, lus-miR396 and lus-miR156 were identified as primary miRNA targets. Cis-acting elements in the promoter regions suggested roles in hormone and stress responses. Expression analysis revealed type II LuMADS genes were associated with floral organ formation and abiotic stresses such as cold, drought, and salt. This research provides insights for improving flax stress resistance and 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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.260
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueiScienceSame topicPlant Molecular Biology ResearchFrench-language works237,207