Root growth inhibition by NH4+ in Arabidopsis is mediated by the root tip and is linked to NH4+ efflux and GMPase activity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Root growth in higher plants is sensitive to excess ammonium (NH(4)(+)). Our study shows that contact of NH(4)(+) with the primary root tip is both necessary and sufficient to the development of arrested root growth under NH(4)(+) nutrition in Arabidopsis. We show that cell elongation and not cell division is the principal target in the NH(4)(+) inhibition of primary root growth. Mutant and expression analyses using DR5:GUS revealed that the growth inhibition is furthermore independent of auxin and ethylene signalling. NH(4)(+) fluxes along the primary root, measured using the Scanning Ion-selective Electrode Technique, revealed a significant stimulation of NH(4)(+) efflux at the elongation zone following treatment with elevated NH(4)(+), coincident with the inhibition of root elongation. Stimulation of NH(4)(+) efflux and inhibition of cell expansion were significantly more pronounced in the NH(4)(+)-hypersensitive mutant vtc1-1, deficient in the enzyme GDP-mannose pyrophosphorylase (GMPase). We conclude that both restricted transmembrane NH(4)(+) fluxes and proper functioning of GMPase in roots are critical to minimizing the severity of the NH(4)(+) toxicity response in Arabidopsis.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".