MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1957674693 · doi:10.1139/cjb-2015-0099

The plant vigor hypothesis applies to a holoparasitic plant on a drought-stressed host

2015· article· en· W1957674693 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bethany A. Evans, Victoria A. Borowicz

Bibliographic record

VenueBotany · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Parasitism and Resistance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyObligateHerbivoreShootHost (biology)BotanyPerennial plantParasitic plantObligate parasiteEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parasitic plants extract resources from host vascular tissues but their responses to environmental fluctuation experienced by the host are poorly studied. Three frequently-cited hypotheses for effects of environmental stress on plant resistance to herbivores predict decreased, increased, or fluctuation in herbivore performance in response to drought stress. We tested which hypothesis best accounts for how drought stress applied to a perennial herb affects growth of the holoparasite, Cuscuta gronovii Willd. ex Roem. & Schult. (common dodder), an obligate shoot parasite. Verbesina alternifolia (L.) Britton ex Kearney (wingstem) supporting single, young C. gronovii were exposed to continuous, pulsed, or no water stress for 32 days and then dry mass of each parasite was determined. Consistent with the plant vigor hypothesis, C. gronovii grew significantly better on well-watered hosts. Continuous and pulsed drought stress of the host resulted in similar growth reduction relative to no drought stress. In addition to reducing absolute growth of the holoparasite, continuous and pulsed drought stress reduced the growth of the holoparasite relative to host growth. Although functionally similar to insect phloem feeders, growth of holoparasites such as C. gronovii is constrained by source–sink relations. Our results suggest drought stress experienced by a host weakens source strength and reduces uptake by the holoparasite acting as a sink.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.771
Threshold uncertainty score0.598

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations11
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBotanySame topicPlant Parasitism and ResistanceFrench-language works237,207