Effects of dehydration and rehydration on the leaf lipids and lipid metabolism in <i>Parkinsonia aculeata</i> (Caesalpiniaceae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plants of Parkinsonia aculeata L. were dehydrated by withholding water for 13 days and then rehydrated. The leaves of control plants and stressed plants were analyzed every four days from the beginning of stress and 6, 24, and 48 h after stress relief. Analysis of leaf water status showed a decrease in relative water content of nearly 16% during dehydration and a return to its control value after 48 h of rehydration. The contents of chlorophylls, chloroplast lipids (monogalactosyldiacylglycerol and digalactosyldiacylglycerol), and neutral lipids increased by 38%, 20%, and 125% (in μg·mg dry mass−1), respectively, when the daily decrease of relative water content reached 1.4%, while the mass of extra-plastidial lipids (phosphatidylcholine and phosphatidylethanolamine) increased by 25% (in μg·mg dry mass−1) only when the daily water loss was 2.6%. In addition, incorporation of radioactive acetate in lipids showed a preferential synthesis of digalactosyldiacylglycerol, phosphatidylglycerol, and phosphatidylcholine. The unsaturation degree of galactolipids remained stable, while a slight increase of unsaturation of phosphatidylcholine and phosphatidylethanolamine was observed. After rehydration, the mass of chlorophylls fell sharply, while the amount of total lipids decreased slowly as the level remained 17% higher than in the control 6 h after stress relief. Our results show that Parkinsonia plants are sensitive to a slight variation of the water potential and respond with an increased synthesis of membrane lipids during stress and after rehydration.
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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".