MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104168157 · doi:10.1093/treephys/28.8.1145

Toward an improved model of maple sap exudation: the location and role of osmotic barriers in sugar maple, butternut and white birch

2008· article· en· W2104168157 on OpenAlexaff
Damián Cirelli, Richard Jagels, Melvin T. Tyree

Bibliographic record

VenueTree Physiology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPlant-Derived Bioactive Compounds
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersU.S. Forest Service
KeywordsXylemOsmotic pressureMapleBiophysicsSugarTracheidSucroseChemistryBotanyParenchymaFiberBiochemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two theories have been proposed to explain how high positive pressures are developed in sugar maple stems when temperatures fluctuate around freezing. The Milburn-O'Malley theory proposes that pressure development is purely physical and does not require living cells or sucrose. The osmotic theory invokes the involvement of living cells and sucrose to generate an osmotic pressure difference between fibers and vessels, which are assumed to be separated by an osmotic barrier. We analyzed wood of Acer saccharum Marsh., Juglans cinerea L. and Betula papyrifera Marsh. (all generate positive pressures) examining three critical components of the osmotic model: pits in cell walls, selectivity of the osmotic barrier and stability of air bubbles under positive xylem pressure. We examined the distribution and type of pits directly by light and scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and indirectly by perfusion of branch segments with fluorescent dyes with molecular masses similar to sucrose. The latter approach allowed us to use osmotic surrogates for sucrose that could be tracked by epifluorescence. Infusion experiments were used to assess the compartmentalization of sucrose and to determine the behavior of gas bubbles as predicted by Fick's and Henry's laws. The SEM images of sugar maple revealed a lack of pitting between fibers and vessels but connections between fiber-tracheids and vessels were present. Fluorescein-perfusion experiments demonstrated that large molecules do not diffuse into libriform fibers but are confined within the domain of vessels, parenchyma and fiber-tracheids. Results of the infusion experiments were in agreement with those of the fluorescein perfusions and further indicated the necessity of a compartmentalized osmolyte to drive stem pressure, as well as the inability of air bubbles to maintain such pressure because of instability. These results support the osmotic model and demonstrate that the secondary cell wall is an effective osmotic barrier for molecules larger than 300 g mol(-1).

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations61
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTree PhysiologySame topicPlant-Derived Bioactive CompoundsFrench-language works237,207