Differences in isoprenoid-mediated energy dissipation pathways between coastal and interior Douglas-fir seedlings in response to drought
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plants have evolved energy dissipation pathways to reduce photooxidative damage under drought when photosynthesis is hampered. Non-volatile and volatile isoprenoids are involved in non-photochemical quenching of excess light energy and scavenging of reactive oxygen species. A better understanding of trees' ability to cope with and withstand drought stress will contribute to mitigate the negative effects of prolonged drought periods expected under future climate conditions. Therefore we investigated if Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii(Mirb.)) provenances from habitats with contrasting water availability reveal intraspecific variation in isoprenoid-mediated energy dissipation pathways. In a controlled drought experiment with 1-year-old seedlings of an interior and a coastal Douglas-fir provenance, we assessed the photosynthetic capacity, pool sizes of non-volatile isoprenoids associated with the photosynthetic apparatus, as well as pool sizes and emission of volatile isoprenoids. We observed variation in the amount and composition of non-volatile and volatile isoprenoids among provenances, which could be linked to variation in photosynthetic capacity under drought. The coastal provenance exhibited an enhanced biosynthesis and emission of volatile isoprenoids, which is likely sustained by generally higher assimilation rates under drought. In contrast, the interior provenance showed an enhanced photoprotection of the photosynthetic apparatus by generally higher amounts of non-volatile isoprenoids and increased amounts of xanthophyll cycle pigments under drought. Our results demonstrate that there is intraspecific variation in isoprenoid-mediated energy dissipation pathways among Douglas-fir provenances, which may be important traits when selecting provenances suitable to grow under future climate conditions.
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) | 0.000 | 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".