Companion cells with high florigen production express other small proteins and reveal a nitrogen-sensitive FT repressor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The precise onset of flowering is crucial for successful reproduction. In longer days, the florigen gene FLOWERING LOCUS T ( FT ) is induced in specific leaf phloem companion cells in Arabidopsis . However, the molecular nature of these cells remains elusive. Here, we utilized bulk nuclei RNA-seq and single nuclei RNA (snRNA)-seq to investigate transcription in FT -expressing cells and other companion cells. Our bulk nuclei RNA-seq demonstrated that FT -expressing cells in cotyledons and true leaves showed differences in FT repressor gene expression. Within true leaves, our snRNA-seq analysis revealed that companion cells with high FT expression form a unique cluster. The cluster expresses other genes encoding small proteins, including the flowering and stem growth inducer FPF1-LIKE PROTEIN 1 (FLP1) and the anti-florigen BROTHER OF FT AND TFL1 (BFT). We also found that the promoters of FT and the genes co-expressed with FT in the cluster were enriched for the binding motif of NITRATE-INDUCIBLE GARP-TYPE TRANSCRIPTIONAL REPRESSOR 1 (NIGT1). Overexpression of NIGT1.2 and NIGT1.4 repressed FT and delayed flowering under nitrogen-rich conditions, implying the roles of NIGT1s as nitrogen-dependent FT repressors. Taken together, our results indicate that unique FT -expressing phloem cells may produce multiple systemic signals to regulate plant growth and development.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".