MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168346326 · doi:10.1104/pp.127.1.202

Spectroscopic Analysis of Desiccation-Induced Alterations of the Chlorophyllide Transformation Pathway in Etiolated Barley Leaves

2001· article· en· W2168346326 on OpenAlexaff
Pascaline Le Lay, Béla Böddi, Dragan Kovačević, Philippe Juneau, David Dewez, Radovan Popovic

Bibliographic record

VenuePLANT PHYSIOLOGY · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPhotosynthetic Processes and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProtochlorophyllideEtiolationHordeum vulgareChemistryGreeningDarknessDesiccationTransformation (genetics)BotanyBiochemistryBiologyEnzymeBiosynthesisPoaceae

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Effects of water deficit on the chlorophyllide (Chlide) transformation pathway were studied in etiolated barley (Hordeum vulgare) leaves by analyzing absorption spectra and 77-K fluorescence spectra deconvoluted in components. Chlide transformations were examined in dehydrated leaves exposed to a 35-ms saturating flash triggering protochlorophyllide (Pchlide) and Chlide transformation processes. During the 90 min following the flash, we found that dehydration induced modifications of Chlide transformations, but no effect on Pchlide phototransformation into Chlide was observed. During this time, content of NADPH-Pchlide oxydoreductase in leaves did not change. Chlide transformation process in dehydrated leaves was characterized by the alteration of the Shibata shift process, by the appearance of a new Chlide species emitting at 692 nm, and by the favored formation of Chl(ide) A(668)F(676). The formation of Chl(ide) A(668)F(676), so-called "free Chlide," was probably induced by disaggregation of highly aggregated Chlide complexes. Here, we offer evidence for the alteration of photoactive Pchlide regeneration process, which may be caused by the desiccation-induced inhibition of Pchlide synthesis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.234

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLANT PHYSIOLOGYSame topicPhotosynthetic Processes and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207