MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403616285 · doi:10.3329/bjb.v53i30.76605

Cloning, sequence analysis, and functional study of the PeDof-4 gene in response to drought stress

2024· article· en· W4403616285 on OpenAlexaff
Ge Chen, Shun Song, Yongcai Huang, Ping Jiang, Gui Jie, Xiongying Jiang, Chonglie Ma, Hong Mo, Bin Zhou, Dayong Fan

Bibliographic record

VenueBangladesh Journal of Botany · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant responses to water stress
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Agriculture
FundersNanning Science and Technology BureauScience and Technology Department of Guangxi Zhuang AutonomousNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsCloning (programming)BiologyGeneSequence (biology)GeneticsDrought stressSequence analysisComputational biologyBotanyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

DNA-binding with one finger (Dof) was a functionally important gene in plant stress tolerance processes. The cloned full-length (849bp) passion fruit PeDof-4 gene was sequenced, which encodes 282 amino acids with the molecular formula C1274H1983N375O408S14, molecular weight 29529.87 u, and theoretical isoelectric point pI of 8.96. Evolutionary tree analysis showed that the PeDof-4-encoded proteins had a high degree of identity with Dof-encoded proteins in other plants. Blastp of the PeDof-4 encoded proteins revealed a closer affinity to the proteins encoded by the Dof of Theobroma cacao. The relative expression of the PeDof-4 gene was higher at 50% of the relative soil moisture content in the fluorescence qPCR experiments under different levels of drought stress. Tissue-specific analysis showed that the highest expression of this gene was found in the roots. Overexpression of GUS gene under the PeDof-4 promoter inbidopsis thaliana showed that PeDof-4 could significantly respond to drought stress. Bangladesh J. Bot. 52(3): 653-663, 2024 (September) Special

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.761
Threshold uncertainty score0.161

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBangladesh Journal of BotanySame topicPlant responses to water stressFrench-language works237,207