MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2898795382 · doi:10.1111/pce.13436

Using the rapid A‐C <sub>i</sub> response (RACiR) in the Li‐Cor 6400 to measure developmental gradients of photosynthetic capacity in poplar

2018· article· en· W2898795382 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Erica H. Lawrence, Joseph R. Stinziano, DAVID HANSON

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Cell & Environment · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOffice of Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive ResearchDivision of Graduate EducationFulbright Canada
KeywordsPhotosynthesisPhotosynthetic capacityStomatal conductanceBiologyBotanyRespirationTranspirationRespiration rateHorticulture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The rapid A‐C i response (RACiR) technique alleviates limitations of measuring photosynthetic capacity by reducing the time needed to determine the maximum carboxylation rate (V cmax ) and electron transport rate (J max ) in leaves. Photosynthetic capacity and its relationships with leaf development are important for understanding ecological and agricultural productivity; however, our current understanding is incomplete. Here, we show that RACiR can be used in previous generation gas exchange systems (i.e., the LI‐6400) and apply this method to rapidly investigate developmental gradients of photosynthetic capacity in poplar. We compared RACiR‐determined V cmax and J max as well as respiration and stomatal conductance (g s ) across four stages of leaf expansion in Populus deltoides and the poplar hybrid 717‐1B4 ( Populus tremula × Populus alba ). These physiological data were paired with leaf traits including nitrogen concentration, chlorophyll concentrations, and specific leaf area. Several traits displayed developmental trends that differed between the poplar species, demonstrating the utility of RACiR approaches to rapidly generate accurate measures of photosynthetic capacity. By using both new and old machines, we have shown how more investigators will be able to incorporate measurements of important photosynthetic traits in future studies and further our understanding of relationships between development and leaf‐level physiology.

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)0.001
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 score0.344
Threshold uncertainty score0.571

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.158 · 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

Citations34
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant Cell & EnvironmentSame topicPlant Water Relations and Carbon DynamicsFrench-language works237,207