The effect of mechanical impedance on root growth in pea (<i>Pisum sativum</i>). II. Cell expansion and wall rheology during recovery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the present work was to determine the factors limiting growth in mechanically impeded roots. Pea roots were grown in compressed and uncompressed sand cores, and then removed and transferred to hydroponics. Root elongation was slowed in impeded sand cores and did not recover to the unimpeded rates until 60 h after transfer to the hydroponics system. Root diameter was greater in impeded roots, and only after 36 h in hydroponics was new root tissue produced of the same diameter as the unimpeded controls. The turgor pressure of the growing cells was measured with a turgor probe and was the same in both treatments. The slower elongation rate of the previously impeded roots was, therefore, the result of axial tightening of the cell walls. Cell length profiles suggested that axial cell wall tightening persisted in the unrestricted hydroponics system. Production of new cells in unrestricted conditions was required before root elongation returned to the unimpeded state. Osmotic potential was decreased by approximately 0.2 MPa in previously impeded roots compared with the unimpeded ones. This corresponds to a decrease in water potential of 0.2 MPa. These data are discussed in relation to regulation of cell extension, solute unloading and the penetration of compacted soils by roots.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".