A meta-analysis of mesophyll conductance to CO <sub>2</sub> in relation to major abiotic stresses in poplar species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Mesophyll conductance ( g m ) determines the diffusion of CO 2 from the substomatal cavities to the site of carboxylation in the chloroplasts and represents a critical limiting factor to photosynthesis. In this study, we evaluated the average effect sizes of different environmental constraints on g m in Populus spp., a forest tree model. We collected raw data of 815 A-C i response curves from 26 datasets to estimate g m , using a single curve-fitting method to alleviate method-related bias. We performed a meta-analysis to assess the effects of different abiotic stresses on g m . We found a significant increase in g m from the bottom to the top of the canopy that was concomitant with the increase of maximum rate of carboxylation and light-saturated photosynthetic rate ( A max ). g m was positively associated with increases in soil moisture and nutrient availability, but insensitive to increasing soil copper concentration, and did not vary with atmospheric CO 2 concentration. Our results showed that g m was strongly related to A max and to a lesser extent to stomatal conductance ( g s ). Also, a negative linear relation was obtained between g m and specific leaf area, which may be used to scale-up g m within the canopy.
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 | 0.013 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.019 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".