Investigating Cytoskeletal Function in Chloroplast Protrusion Formation in the Arctic‐Alpine Plant <i>Oxyria digyna</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Arctic and alpine plants like Oxyria digyna have to face enhanced environmental stress. This study compared leaves from Oxyria digyna collected in the Arctic at Svalbard (78 degrees N) and in the Austrian Alps (47 degrees N) at cellular, subcellular, and ultrastructural levels. Oxyria digyna plants collected in Svalbard had significantly thicker leaves than the samples collected in the Austrian Alps. This difference was generated by increased thickness of the palisade and spongy mesophyll layers in the arctic plants, while epidermal cells had no significant size differences between the two habitats. A characteristic feature of arctic, alpine, and cultivated samples was the occurrence of broad stroma-filled chloroplast protrusions, 2 - 5 microm broad and up to 5 microm long. Chloroplast protrusions were in close spatial contact with other organelles including mitochondria and microbodies. Mitochondria were also present in invaginations of the chloroplasts. A dense network of cortical microtubules found in the mesophyll cells suggested a potential role for microtubules in the formation and function of chloroplast protrusions. No direct interactions between microtubules and chloroplasts, however, were observed and disruption of the microtubule arrays with the anti-microtubule agent oryzalin at 5 - 10 microM did not alter the appearance or dynamics of chloroplast protrusions. These observations suggest that, in contrast to studies on stromule formation in Nicotiana, microtubules are not involved in the formation and morphology of chloroplast protrusions in Oxyria digyna. The actin microfilament-disrupting drug latrunculin B (5 - 10 microM for 2 h) arrested cytoplasmic streaming and altered the cytoplasmic integrity of mesophyll cells. However, at the ultrastructural level, stroma-containing, thylakoid-free areas were still visible, mostly at the concave sides of the chloroplasts. As chloroplast protrusions were frequently found to be mitochondria-associated in Oxyria digyna, a role in metabolite exchange is possible, which may contribute to an adaptation to alpine and arctic conditions.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".