MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2397868456 · doi:10.1038/srep25908

Dynamic allocation and transfer of non-structural carbohydrates, a possible mechanism for the explosive growth of Moso bamboo (Phyllostachys heterocycla)

2016· article· en· W2397868456 on OpenAlexaff
Xinzhang Song, Changhui Peng, Guomo Zhou, Honghao Gu, Quan Li, Chao Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsPhyllostachysRhizomeBambooBamboo shootShootBotanyBiologyExplosive materialPlant stemHorticultureChemistryEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Moso bamboo can rapidly complete its growth in both height and diameter within only 35-40 days after shoot emergence. However, the underlying mechanism for this "explosive growth" remains poorly understood. We investigated the dynamics of non-structural carbohydrates (NSCs) in shoots and attached mature bamboos over a 20-month period. The results showed that Moso bamboos rapidly completed their height and diameter growth within 38 days. At the same time, attached mature bamboos transferred almost all the NSCs of their leaves, branches, and especially trunks and rhizomes to the "explosively growing" shoots via underground rhizomes for the structural growth and metabolism of shoots. Approximately 4 months after shoot emergence, this transfer stopped when the leaves of the young bamboos could independently provide enough photoassimilates to meet the carbon demands of the young bamboos. During this period, the NSC content of the leaves, branches, trunks and rhizomes of mature bamboos declined by 1.5, 23, 28 and 5 fold, respectively. The trunk contributed the most NSCs to the shoots. Our findings provide new insight and a possible rational mechanism explaining the "explosive growth" of Moso bamboo and shed new light on understanding the role of NSCs in the rapid growth of Moso bamboo.

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 score0.242
Threshold uncertainty score0.246

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations194
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicPlant Water Relations and Carbon DynamicsFrench-language works237,207