Spatial and temporal changes in multiple hormone groups during lateral bud release shortly following apex decapitation of chickpea (<i>Cicer arietinum</i>) seedlings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although the co‐ordination of promotive root‐sourced cytokinin (CK) and inhibitory shoot apex‐sourced auxin (IAA) is central to all current models on lateral bud dormancy release, control by those hormones alone has appeared inadequate in many studies. Thus it was hypothesized that the IAA : CK model is the central control but that it must be considered within the relevant timeframe leading to lateral bud release and against a backdrop of interactions with other hormone groups. Therefore, IAA and a wide survey of cytokinins (CKs), were examined along with abscisic acid (ABA) and polyamines (PAs) in released buds, tissue surrounding buds and xylem sap at 1 and 4 h after apex removal, when lateral buds of chickpea are known to break dormancy. Three potential lateral bud growth inhibitors, IAA, ABA and cis‐zeatin 9‐riboside (ZR), declined sharply in the released buds and xylem following decapitation. This is in contrast to potential dormancy breaking CKs like trans‐ZR and trans‐zeantin 9‐riboside 5′phosphate (ZRMP), which represented the strongest correlative changes by increasing 3.5‐fold in xylem sap and 22‐fold in buds. PAs had not changed significantly in buds or other tissues after 4 h, so they were not directly involved in the breaking of bud dormancy. Results from the xylem and surrounding tissues indicated that bud CK increases resulted from a combination synthesis in the bud and selective loading of CK nucleotides into the xylem from the root.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".