Involvement of cytokinin in the stimulation of nodulation by low concentrations of ammonium in<i>Pisum sativum</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nodulation in pea (Pisum sativumL.) grown in hydroponic and sand culture systems is stimulated by low concentrations (<1.0 mM) of ammonium, but the physiological mechanisms underlying this stimulation are unknown. The current study involves a series of experiments, which investigate if the ammonium‐induced stimulation of nodulation involves changes in endogenous hormone (auxin and cytokinin) levels.P. sativumL. cv. Express was grown in growth pouches for 1 week with mineral N (0.5 and 2.0 mMNH4+or NO3–) or for 3 weeks exposed to exogenous indole‐3‐acetic acid (IAA) or 6‐benzylaminopurine (BAP) at a range of concentrations (10‐9−10‐5 M). Ammonium enhanced nodulation on the basis of both early whole plant (nodules plant−1) and specific nodulation (nodules g−1root DW), especially in 0.5 mMtreatment in which nodulation was approximately 4‐fold of the mineral‐N‐free control 1 week after inoculation. Correspondingly, the roots treated with ammonium contained much higher levels oft‐zeatin (Z) and lowert‐zeatin riboside (ZR) than that the control or nitrate‐treated plants. There was no significant difference in IAA levels between the control and ammonium treatments. Exogenous application of BAP for 3 weeks at concentrations of 10‐7−10‐5 Mstrongly inhibited nodulation. However, 10−9 MBAP, but not IAA, significantly enhanced nodulation. These data support the theory that a relatively high ratio of cytokinin:auxin in roots is favourable for nodule initiation, but that an excessively high level of cytokinin inhibits nodulation. Based on these results we propose that stimulation of nodulation by low concentrations of ammonium may be mediated through increasing Z level in roots, which alters the balance of cytokinin and auxin, which in turn induces cortical cell divisions leading to nodule initiation.
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) | 0.001 | 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".