MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069208461 · doi:10.1093/jxb/eri092

Gating of aquaporins by low temperature in roots of chilling-sensitive cucumber and chilling-tolerant figleaf gourd

2005· article· en· W2069208461 on OpenAlexfundno aff
S. H. Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Botany · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicIon Transport and Channel Regulation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of WaterlooKorea Science and Engineering FoundationChonnam National University
KeywordsGourdEndodermisCucumisHorticultureBotanyChemistryBitter gourdQ10CucurbitaceaeBiologyMomordica

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Effects of low temperature (8 degrees C) on the hydraulic conductivity of young roots of a chilling-sensitive (cucumber, Cucumis sativus L.) and a chilling-resistant (figleaf gourd, Cucurbita ficifolia Bouche) crop have been measured at the levels of whole root systems (root hydraulic conductivity, Lp(r)) and of individual cortical cells (cell hydraulic conductivity, Lp). Exposure of roots to low temperature (LRT) for up to 6 d caused a stronger suberization of the endodermis in cucumber compared with figleaf gourd, but no development of exodermal Casparian bands in either species. Changes in anatomy after 6 d of LRT treatment corresponded with a reduction in hydrostatic root Lp(r) of cucumber roots by a factor of 24, and by a factor of 2 in figleaf gourd. In figleaf gourd, there was a reduction only in hydrostatic Lp(r) but not in osmotic Lp(r) suggesting that the activity of water channels was not much affected by LRT treatment in this species. Changes in cell Lp in response to chilling and recovery were similar to the root levels, although they were more intense at the root level. Activation energies (E(a)) and Q10 of water flow as measured at the cell level were high in cucumber (E(a)=109+/-13 kJ mol(-1); Q(10)=4.8+/-0.7; n=6-10 cells), but small in figleaf gourd (E(a)=11+/-2 kJ mol(-1); Q10=1.2+/-0.1; n=6-10 cells). Roots of figleaf gourd recovered better from LRT treatment than those of cucumber. In figleaf gourd, recovery (at both the root and cell level) often resulted in Lp and Lp(r) values which were even bigger than the original, i.e. there was an overshoot in hydraulic conductivity. These effects were larger for osmotic (representing the cell-to-cell passage of water) than for hydrostatic Lp(r). After a short-term (1 d) exposure to 8 degrees C followed by 1 d at 20 degrees C, hydrostatic Lp(r) of cucumber nearly recovered and that of figleaf gourd still remained higher due to the overshoot. By contrast, osmotic Lp(r) and cell Lp in both species remained high by a factor of 3 compared with the control, possibly due to an increased activity of water channels. After preconditioning of roots at LRT, increased hydraulic conductivity was completely inhibited by HgCl2 at both the root and cell levels. Different from figleaf gourd, recovery from chilling was not complete in cucumber after longer exposure to LRT. It is concluded that at LRT, both changes in the activity of aquaporins (AQPs) and alterations of root anatomy determine the water uptake in both species. The high temperature dependence of cell Lp in cucumber suggests conformational changes of AQPs during LRT treatment which result in channel closure and in a strong gating of AQP activity by low temperature. This mechanism is thought to be different from that in figleaf gourd where AQPs reacted in the conventional way, i.e. low temperature affected the mobility of water molecules in AQPs rather than their open/closed state, and Q(10) was low.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 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

Citations91
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental BotanySame topicIon Transport and Channel RegulationFrench-language works237,207