The face value of ion fluxes: the challenge of determining influx in the low-affinity transport range
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The existence of distinct high- and low-affinity transport systems (HATS and LATS) is well established for major nutrient ions. However, influx mediated by these systems is usually estimated using uniformly simple tracer protocols. Two (42)K radiotracer methods to measure potassium influxes in the HATS and LATS ranges in intact barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) roots are compared here: a direct influx (DI) method, and an integrated flux analysis (IFA), which is designed to account for tracer efflux from labelled roots and differential tracer accumulation along the plant axis. Methods showed only minor discrepancies for influx values in the HATS range, but large discrepancies in the LATS range, revealing striking distinctions in the cellular exchange properties dominated by the operation of the two transport systems. It is shown that accepted DI protocols are associated with very large errors in the high-conductance LATS range, underestimating influx at least 6-fold due to four characteristics of this transport mode: (i) accelerated cellular (42)K exchange; (ii) a greatly increased ratio of efflux to influx; (iii) increased (42)K loss during the removal of water from roots in preweighing centrifugation or blotting protocols; and (iv) increased (42)K retention at the root-shoot interface, a region of the plant frequently disregarded in DI determinations. The findings warrant a re-evaluation of a large body of literature reporting influx in the LATS range, and are of fundamental importance to ion flux experimentation in plant physiology.
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 | 0.001 | 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".