The case for cytosolic NO<sub>3</sub><sup>–</sup> heterostasis: a critique of a recently proposed model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT A model recently proposed by Siddiqi & Glass (Plant, Cell, and Environment 25, 1211–1217, 2002) attempts to reconcile discrepancies in the measurement of cytosolic nitrate concentrations ([NO3–]cyt) in plant root cells, specifically between low (∼ 4 mm) homeostatic values reported in studies using ion‐specific microelectrodes on the one hand, and wide fluctuations in [NO3–]cyt reported in other studies, especially those using compartmental analysis by tracer efflux (CATE). Although Siddiqi & Glass concede that cytosolic NO3– homeostasis, as determined by microelectrodes, is at odds with certain experimental observations, they nevertheless promote a model that takes microelectrode readings at face value, and assert that the variations seen using CATE methodology are artefacts attributable to contributions from substantial, rapidly exchanging, and highly variable NO3– pools putatively residing in organelles such as plastids and the endoplasmic reticulum. We show here that such a model is not tenable, drawing upon experimental evidence from previous studies, and from a more comprehensive model that examines the characteristics and consequences of subcompartmented cytoplasmic exchange in root cells.
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 | 0.020 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.018 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
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".