MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055730507 · doi:10.1093/aob/mcq183

A model of canopy photosynthesis incorporating protein distribution through the canopy and its acclimation to light, temperature and CO2

2010· article· en· W2055730507 on OpenAlexaff
I. R. Johnson, John H. M. Thornley, Jonathan M. Frantz, Bruce Bugbee

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Botany · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCanopyBiologyPhotosynthesisAcclimatizationAtmospheric sciencesBotanyDistribution (mathematics)Ecology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The distribution of photosynthetic enzymes, or nitrogen, through the canopy affects canopy photosynthesis, as well as plant quality and nitrogen demand. Most canopy photosynthesis models assume an exponential distribution of nitrogen, or protein, through the canopy, although this is rarely consistent with experimental observation. Previous optimization schemes to derive the nitrogen distribution through the canopy generally focus on the distribution of a fixed amount of total nitrogen, which fails to account for the variation in both the actual quantity of nitrogen in response to environmental conditions and the interaction of photosynthesis and respiration at similar levels of complexity. MODEL: A model of canopy photosynthesis is presented for C(3) and C(4) canopies that considers a balanced approach between photosynthesis and respiration as well as plant carbon partitioning. Protein distribution is related to irradiance in the canopy by a flexible equation for which the exponential distribution is a special case. The model is designed to be simple to parameterize for crop, pasture and ecosystem studies. The amount and distribution of protein that maximizes canopy net photosynthesis is calculated. KEY RESULTS: The optimum protein distribution is not exponential, but is quite linear near the top of the canopy, which is consistent with experimental observations. The overall concentration within the canopy is dependent on environmental conditions, including the distribution of direct and diffuse components of irradiance. CONCLUSIONS: The widely used exponential distribution of nitrogen or protein through the canopy is generally inappropriate. The model derives the optimum distribution with characteristics that are consistent with observation, so overcoming limitations of using the exponential distribution. Although canopies may not always operate at an optimum, optimization analysis provides valuable insight into plant acclimation to environmental conditions. Protein distribution has implications for the prediction of carbon assimilation, plant quality and nitrogen demand.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.187
Threshold uncertainty score0.218

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations57
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of BotanySame topicPlant Water Relations and Carbon DynamicsFrench-language works237,207