MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407574556 · doi:10.1126/sciadv.ads4888

Squalene acts as a feedback signaling molecule in facilitating bidirectional communication between tea plants

2025· article· en· W4407574556 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jieyang Jin, Mingyue Zhao, Keke Yu, Mengting Zhang, Jingming Wang, Yutong Hu, Danyang Guo, Qiang Wang, Jilai Cui, Tingting Jing, Wilfried Schwab, Chuankui Song

Bibliographic record

VenueScience Advances · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Parasitism and Resistance
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of GeneticsChinese Academy of SciencesDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsBrassinosteroidSqualeneSignal transductionYeastSqualene monooxygenaseBiologyPlant speciesBotanyChemistryCell biologyBiochemistryArabidopsisBiosynthesisGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plants respond to environmental stimuli by releasing volatile organic compounds (VOCs), which play diverse roles in plant-to-plant interactions. Previous studies have primarily focused on how receiving plants respond. However, little is known about how these receivers communicate back to the emitter plants and their subsequent impacts. Our findings indicated increased plant tolerance when neighboring plants were present, suggesting bidirectional plant communication. Furthermore, we established a model to explore the role of signals from receiver plants, identifying squalene as a crucial feedback signal enhancing the cold tolerance in emitter plants by up-regulating CsCBF5 expression. Further analysis using yeast one-hybrid analysis coupled with inhibition of brassinosteroid pathways suggested that squalene-induced castasterone (CS) accumulation directly activated CsCBF5 expression modulated by CsBES1/BZR1 . Overall, these results demonstrated the role of the squalene-CS- BES1/BZR1 - CBF5 pathway in the bidirectional communication between plants, expanding our understanding of plant interactions.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.667
Threshold uncertainty score0.378

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations16
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScience AdvancesSame topicPlant Parasitism and ResistanceFrench-language works237,207