Chilling and frost tolerance in Miscanthus and Saccharum genotypes bred for cool temperate climates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Miscanthus hybrids are leading candidates for bioenergy feedstocks in mid to high latitudes of North America and Eurasia, due to high productivity associated with the C4 photosynthetic pathway and their tolerance of cooler conditions. However, as C4 plants, they may lack tolerance of chilling conditions (0-10 °C) and frost, particularly when compared with candidate C3 crops at high latitudes. In higher latitudes, cold tolerance is particularly important if the feedstock is to utilize fully the long, early-season days of May and June. Here, leaf gas exchange and fluorescence are used to assess chilling tolerance of photosynthesis in five Miscanthus hybrids bred for cold tolerance, a complex Saccharum hybrid (energycane), and an upland sugarcane variety with some chilling tolerance. The chilling treatment consisted of transferring warm-grown plants (25/20 °C day/night growth temperatures) to chilling (12/5 °C) conditions for 1 week, followed by assessing recovery after return to warm temperatures. Chilling tolerance was also evaluated in outdoor, spring-grown Miscanthus genotypes before and after a cold front that was punctuated by a frost event. Miscanthus×giganteus was found to be the most chilling-tolerant genotype based on its ability to maintain a high net CO2 assimilation rate (A) during chilling, and recover A to a greater degree following a return to warm conditions. This was associated with increasing its capacity for short-term dark-reversible photoprotective processes (ΦREG) and the proportion of open photosystem II reaction centres (qL) while minimizing photoinactivation (ΦNF). Similarly, in the field, M.×giganteus exhibited a significantly greater A and pre-dawn F v/F m after the cold front compared with the other chilling-sensitive Miscanthus hybrids.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".