MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3004432508 · doi:10.1093/jxb/eraa049

The intersection of nitrogen nutrition and water use in plants: new paths toward improved crop productivity

2020· review· en· W3004432508 on OpenAlexaff
Darren Plett, Kosala Ranathunge, Vanessa Melino, Noriyuki Kuya, Yusaku Uga, Herbert J. Kronzucker

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Botany · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant nutrient uptake and metabolism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsApoplastNitrogenTranspirationEnvironmental scienceAgronomyWater transportProductivityCropWater useNitrateWater flowBiologyChemistryPhotosynthesisEnvironmental engineeringBotanyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Water and nitrogen availability limit crop productivity globally more than most other environmental factors. Plant availability of macronutrients such as nitrate is, to a large extent, regulated by the amount of water available in the soil, and, during drought episodes, crops can become simultaneously water and nitrogen limited. In this review, we explore the intricate relationship between water and nitrogen transport in plants, from transpiration-driven mass flow in the soil to uptake by roots via membrane transporters and channels and transport to aerial organs. We discuss the roles of root architecture and of suberized hydrophobic root barriers governing apoplastic water and nitrogen movement into the vascular system. We also highlight the need to identify the signalling cascades regulating water and nitrogen transport, as well as the need for targeted physiological analyses of plant traits influencing water and nitrogen uptake. We further advocate for incorporation of new phenotyping technologies, breeding strategies, and agronomic practices to improve crop yield in water- and nitrogen-limited production systems.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations273
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental BotanySame topicPlant nutrient uptake and metabolismFrench-language works237,207