The Contribution of Carbon and Water in Modulating Wood Formation in Black Spruce Saplings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nonstructural carbohydrates (NSCs) play a crucial role in xylem formation and represent, with water, the main constraint to plant growth. We assessed the relationships between xylogenesis and NSCs in order to (1) verify the variance explained by NSCs and (2) determine the influence of intrinsic (tissue supplying carbon) and extrinsic (water availability and temperature) factors. During 2 years, wood formation was monitored in saplings of black spruce (Picea mariana) subjected to a dry period of about 1 month in June and exposed to different temperature treatments in a greenhouse. In parallel, NSC concentrations were determined by extracting the sugar compounds from two tissues (cambium and inner xylem), both potentially supplying carbon for wood formation. A mixed-effect model was used to assess and quantify the potential relationships. Total xylem cells, illustrating meristematic activity, were modeled as a function of water, sucrose, and d-pinitol (conditional r(2) of 0.79). Water availability was ranked as the most important factor explaining total xylem cell production, while the contribution of carbon was lower. Cambium stopped dividing under water deficit, probably to limit the number of cells remaining in differentiation without an adequate amount of water. By contrast, carbon factors were ranked as most important in explaining the variation in living cells (conditional r(2) of 0.49), highlighting the functional needs during xylem development, followed by the tissue supplying the NSCs (cambium) and water availability. This study precisely demonstrates the role of carbon and water in structural growth expressed as meristematic activity and tissue formation.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".