MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099199327 · doi:10.1093/aob/mcr238

Plant growth and respiration re-visited: maintenance respiration defined – it is an emergent property of, not a separate process within, the system – and why the respiration : photosynthesis ratio is conservative

2011· article· en· W2099199327 on OpenAlexaff
John H. M. Thornley

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Botany · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant responses to water stress
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersAgResearch
KeywordsRespirationBiologyPhotosynthesisCredibilityProcess (computing)Cellular respirationBiological systemBotanyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Plant growth and respiration still has unresolved issues, examined here using a model. The aims of this work are to compare the model's predictions with McCree's observation-based respiration equation which led to the 'growth respiration/maintenance respiration paradigm' (GMRP) - this is required to give the model credibility; to clarify the nature of maintenance respiration (MR) using a model which does not represent MR explicitly; and to examine algebraic and numerical predictions for the respiration:photosynthesis ratio. METHODS: A two-state variable growth model is constructed, with structure and substrate, applicable on plant to ecosystem scales. Four processes are represented: photosynthesis, growth with growth respiration (GR), senescence giving a flux towards litter, and a recycling of some of this flux. There are four significant parameters: growth efficiency, rate constants for substrate utilization and structure senescence, and fraction of structure returned to the substrate pool. KEY RESULTS: The model can simulate McCree's data on respiration, providing an alternative interpretation to the GMRP. The model's parameters are related to parameters used in this paradigm. MR is defined and calculated in terms of the model's parameters in two ways: first during exponential growth at zero growth rate; and secondly at equilibrium. The approaches concur. The equilibrium respiration:photosynthesis ratio has the value of 0·4, depending only on growth efficiency and recycling fraction. CONCLUSIONS: McCree's equation is an approximation that the model can describe; it is mistaken to interpret his second coefficient as a maintenance requirement. An MR rate is defined and extracted algebraically from the model. MR as a specific process is not required and may be replaced with an approach from which an MR rate emerges. The model suggests that the respiration:photosynthesis ratio is conservative because it depends on two parameters only whose values are likely to be similar across ecosystems.

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)0.001
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 score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.354

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.154 · 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

Citations73
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of BotanySame topicPlant responses to water stressFrench-language works237,207