The characterization of photoinhibition and recovery during cold acclimation in <i>Arabidopsis thaliana</i> using chlorophyll fluorescence imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The responses to photoinhibition of photosynthesis at low temperature and subsequent recovery were examined in Arabidopsis thaliana (ecotype Columbia) developed at 4°C cold‐acclimating conditions, 23°C non‐acclimating conditions and for non‐acclimated plants shifted to 4°C (cold‐shifted). These responses were determined in planta using Chl fluorescence imaging. We show that cold acclimation results in an increased tolerance to photoinhibition in comparison with non‐acclimated plants and that growth and development at low temperature is essential for this to occur. Cold‐shifted plants were not as tolerant as the cold‐acclimated plants. In addition, we demonstrate this tolerance is as a result of growth under high PSII excitation pressure, that can be modulated by growth temperature or growth irradiance. Cold‐acclimated and cold‐shifted plants fully recover from photoinhibition in the dark, whereas non‐acclimated plants show reduced levels of recovery and demonstrate a requirement for light. The role of the PSII repair cycle, PSII quenching centres, and the use of Chl fluorescence imaging to monitor photoinhibitory responses in planta are discussed.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".