MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3113804097 · doi:10.1111/pce.13990

Photosystem II heat tolerances characterize thermal generalists and the upper limit of carbon assimilation

2020· article· en· W3113804097 on OpenAlexaff
Timothy M. Perez, Annika Socha, Olga Tserej, Kenneth J. Feeley

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Cell & Environment · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPhotosynthetic Processes and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersGarden Club of AmericaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhotosynthesisCarbon assimilationGeneralist and specialist speciesAssimilation (phonology)Photosystem IIThermalEnvironmental scienceBotanyBiologyAtmospheric sciencesChemistryEcologyPhysicsMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The heat tolerance of photosystem II (PSII) may promote carbon assimilation at higher temperatures and help explain plant responses to climate change. Higher PSII heat tolerance could lead to (a) increases in the high‐temperature compensation point (T max ); (b) increases in the thermal breadth of photosynthesis (i.e. the photosynthetic parameter Ω) to promote a thermal generalist strategy of carbon assimilation; (c) increases in the optimum rate of carbon assimilation P opt and faster carbon assimilation and/or (d) increases in the optimum temperature for photosynthesis (T opt ). To address these hypotheses, we tested if the T crit , T 50 and T 95 PSII heat tolerances were correlated with carbon assimilation parameters for 21 plant species. Our results did not support Hypothesis 1, but we observed that T 50 may be used to estimate the upper thermal limit for T max at the species level, and that community mean T crit may be useful for approximating T max . The T 50 and T 95 heat tolerance metrics were positively correlated with Ω in support of Hypothesis 2. We found no support for Hypotheses 3 or 4. Our study shows that high PSII heat tolerance is unlikely to improve carbon assimilation at higher temperatures but may characterize thermal generalists with slow resource acquisition strategies.

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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.328

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.167
Teacher spread0.159 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant Cell & EnvironmentSame topicPhotosynthetic Processes and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207