MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Seasonal adaptations of the tuberous roots of <i>Ranunculus asiaticus</i> to desiccation and resurrection by changes in cell structure and protein content

2005· article· en· W2008767625 on OpenAlexaff
Rina Kamenetsky, R. L. Peterson, Lewis Melville, Cibele Ferreira Machado, J. Derek Bewley

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Phytologist · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant responses to water stress
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDesiccationBiologyBotanyStarchPectinCell wallDesiccation toleranceBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The annual developmental cycle of tuberous roots of Ranunculus asiaticus was studied with respect to structure and content of their cells, to understand how these roots are adapted to desiccation, high temperature and rehydration. Light microscopy, histochemical analysis, and protein analyses by SDS-PAGE were employed at eight stages of annual root development. During growth and maturation of the roots, cortical cells increased in size and their cell walls accumulated pectin materials in a distinct layer to the inside of the primary walls, with pits between adjoining cells. The number of starch granules and protein bodies also increased within the cells. Several discrete proteins accumulated. Following quiescence and rehydration of the roots there was a loss of starch and proteins from the cells, and cell walls decreased in thickness. The resurrection geophyte R. asiaticus possesses desiccation-tolerant annual roots. They store carbon and nitrogen reserves within their cells, and pectin within the walls to support growth of the plant following summer quiescence and rehydration.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations25
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew PhytologistSame topicPlant responses to water stressFrench-language works237,207