Root Temperature and Aeration Effects on the Protein Profile of Canola Leaves
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canola ( Brassica napus L.) is planted in early spring and must survive both low soil temperatures and periods of wet weather. Shoot effects result from both low root temperature and low aeration, but little is known about the interaction between these two environmental factors, particularly with respect to changes in gene products. In this study, canola plants (‘46A65’) were treated in solution culture. Shoot temperatures were maintained at day/night temperatures of 24/18°C, while roots were maintained at an ambient temperature of 24/18°C, or cooled to 10°C. Roots were either aerated, or not aerated to create hypoxic treatments. Plants with roots in cold and hypoxic solution accumulated starch in the root, and had greater reductions in fresh weight and leaf area than those in either cold or hypoxic treatments alone. Twenty‐one changes in protein expression were also found in the cold hypoxic treatment, 17 of which were not found in either cold or hypoxic treatments alone. Gene products up‐regulated in leaves included cytochrome oxidase Subunit I (COX1) in response to hypoxia, elongation factor eEF1 γ chain in plants with cooled roots, and chaperonin 10 when roots were cooled without aeration. Results demonstrate the interaction between multiple stresses on a molecular level, and suggest that flooding under cool soil temperatures will be more detrimental to canola than that which occurs at warmer temperatures.
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".