Effects of Methanol on Photosynthetic Processes and Growth of Lemna gibba¶
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Effects of methanol on growth and photosynthetic activity of Lemna gibba exposed under continuous illumination were examined. As a higher plant, L. gibba appeared to be much more sensitive to methanol inhibitory effect compared with some algae (Theodoridou et al. [2002] Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 1573, 189-198). We found that stimulatory or inhibitory effects were strongly dependent on the methanol concentration and the time of exposure. When the exposure was up to 0.2% methanol, the growth rate of biomass was improved by 50%. However, stimulatory effect of methanol appeared to be smaller when plants were exposed for 48 h compared with 24 h. Increase in biomass induced by methanol was not based on the increase in primary photosynthetic process but rather on accommodation of energy dissipation during photosynthesis. Inhibitory effect on the growth of L. gibba already observed for 0.5% methanol was strongly associated with the increase in the nonphotochemical energy dissipation. The ratio between biomass and methanol concentration appeared to determine the stimulatory or the inhibitory effect. Suggested explanations for the stimulatory and the inhibitory effects are presented.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".