The Interactive Effect of Elevated CO2 and Herbivores on the Nitrogen-Fixing Plant Alnus incana ssp. rugosa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many studies have found that future predicted CO2 levels can increase plant mass but dilute N content in leaves, impacting antiherbivore compounds. Nitrogen-fixing plants may balance their leaf C:N ratio under elevated CO2, counteracting this dilution effect. However, we know little of how plants respond to herbivores at the higher CO2 levels that occurred when nitrogen-fixing plants first evolved. We grew Alnus incana ssp. rugosa was grown at 400, 800, or 1600 ppm CO2 in soil collected from the field, inoculated with Frankia and exposed to herbivores (Orgyia leucostigma). Elevated CO2 increased nodulated plant biomass and stimulated the nitrogen fixation rate in the early growth stage. However, nitrogen-fixing plants were not able to balance their C:N ratio under elevated CO2 after growing for 19 weeks. When plants were grown at 400 and 1600 ppm CO2, herbivores preferred to feed on leaves of nodulated plants. At 800 ppm CO2, nodulated plants accumulated more total phenolic compounds in response to herbivore damage than plants in the non-Frankia and non-herbivore treatments. Our results suggest that plant leaf defence, not leaf nutritional content, is the dominant driver of herbivory and nitrogen-fixing plants have limited ability to balance C:N ratios at elevated CO2 in natural soil.
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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".