Response of photosynthesis in leaves of Sorghum bicolor×S.sudanense seedlings to phenanthrene polluted soils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the present study,the effects of phenanthrene(Phe)polluted soils on celerity chlorophyll fluorescence kinetics parameters of Sorghumbicolor×S.sudanense seedlings were studied.The results showed that these parameters such as Fm,Fv/Fm,Fv/Foand PIABSof the studied plants decreased with the increase of Phe concentrations which indicated that the Phe in soils inhibited the PSⅡ photochemical activities of these studied S.bicolor×S.sudanense seedlings.The study about electronic supply and transmission capacity of electronic donor side and receptor side of the PSⅡ showed that the fluorescence intensity increased and the activity of oxygen-evolving complex(OEC)decreased over 0.3ms(K point)of OJIP curve in studied samples.Phe stressing also caused the the fluorescence intensity increasement at the J point and I point on the OJIP curve in the leaves of Phe stressed S.bicolor×S.sudanense seedlings which indicated that Phe stress reduced the electronic acceptance ability at the electronic receptor side of PSⅡ and blocked the electronic transmission from QAto QB.The optical energy absorption and distribution in leaves of S.bicolor×S.sudanense seedlings were significantly influenced by Phe stress.With the increase of Phe concentration,the ratio of optical energy absorbed by PSⅡ reaction center and used for electron transfer after QA-as well as the energy absorbed by each unit reaction center and used for electron transfer reduced in the leaves of treated S.bicolor×S.sudanenseseedlings.It indicated that the proportion of optical energy captured by reaction center and used for photochemical reaction reduced and the proportion of invalid heat dissipation increased.Based on these results,it could be suggested that there were three important reasons for the reduction of PSⅡ reactive center activity in leaves of S.bicolor×S.sudanense seedlings in the Phe stress soil which included the damage of OEC at electron donor side of PSⅡ,the electron transfer ability reduction at the electron acceptor side of PSⅡ and the change of the distribution and utilization of optical energy.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".