Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Do roots obtain water for their growth directly from soil surrounding the growth zone or indirectly, via phloem, from water absorbed elsewhere? Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) was studied with time-lapse imaging of seminal axile roots, growing in soil and air in a custom-made laboratory rhizotron, before and after excision. The growth data were combined with a theoretical estimate of the amount of water that could be supplied from the phloem. Roots readily extended into air, providing strong evidence that they obtain a portion of their growth-sustaining water internally. The time-lapse experiments indicated that in moist soil, internal sources provided 26–45% of the water for root growth, but the rest came externally from the soil surrounding the growth zone. From the theoretical analysis, the phloem could supply, on average, 64% of the total, accounting for all the internal sources. This indicates that phloem water could be used when root tips cannot access external water, such as in cracks or pores, or regions of dry soil. The distribution of phloem-delivered water for root growth should be considered in whole-plant modelling of root systems. Maximising phloem flux at root tips might confer more efficient use of soil water by crops.
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.
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 it