Organelle Extensions in Plant Cells<sup>F</sup>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cell walls lock each cell in a specific position within the supra-organization of a plant. Despite its fixed location, each cell must be able to sense alterations in its immediate environment and respond rapidly to ensure the optimal functioning, continued growth and development, and eventual long-term survival of the plant. The ultra-structural detail that underlies our present understanding of the plant cell has largely been acquired from fixed and processed material that does not allow an appreciation of the dynamic nature of sub-cellular events in the cell. In recent years, fluorescent protein-aided imaging of living plant cells has added to our understanding of the dynamic nature of the plant cell. One of the major outcomes of live imaging of plant cells is the growing appreciation that organelle shapes are not fixed, and many organelles extend their surface transiently in rapid response to environmental stimuli. In many cases, the extensions appear as tubules extending from the main organelle. Specific terms such as stromules from plastids, matrixules from mitochondria, and peroxules from peroxisomes have been coined to describe the extensions. Here, we review our present understanding of organelle extensions and discuss how they may play potential roles in maintaining cellular homeostasis in plant cells.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.005 |
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".