Growth and chemical defense in relation to resource availability: tradeoffs or common responses to environmental stress?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One aspect of plant defense is the production of constitutive secondary compounds that confer toxicity on herbivores and pathogens. The purpose of this study was to compare patterns of plant tissue toxicity across gradients of irradiance and nutrient content. We measured the potential toxicity (1/LC50) of extracts of six species of herbaceous Asteraceae grown under controlled conditions of temperature (25 degrees C), humidity (80%), photoperiod (16 h/day), in a range of concentrations of a modified Hoagland hydroponic solution (full-strength, 1/5 dilute, 1/10 dilute, and 1/50 dilute) and under two different light intensities (250 and 125 micromol/m2/s). The plants grew from seed for 42 days post-germination, and randomly chosen plants were harvested each 7 days. We did a general measure of potential phytochemical toxicity using an alcohol extraction of secondary compounds followed by brine shrimp (Artemia sp.) bioassay. Contrary to the carbon/nutrient balance hypothesis, tissue toxicity generally increased with decreasing irradiance and nutrient levels, so that plants whose growth was most restricted had tissues that were most toxic, although there were species-specific differences in this trend.
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".