MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Changes in elastic modulus, leaf tensity and leaf density during dehydration of detached leaves in two plant species of Moraceae

2021· article· en· W3195667963 on OpenAlexaff
Deke Xing, Xiaole Chen, Yanyou Wu, Zhenyi Li, S. U. Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueChilean journal of agricultural research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLeaf Properties and Growth Measurement
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaPriority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education InstitutionsGovernment of Jiangsu ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMoraceaeDehydrationBotanyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The quick adjustments of leaf traits are critical for keeping the survival of plants under dehydration. In this study, we examined the hypotheses that plants would adapt to dehydration by shrinking its mesophyll cells to offset the water loss, or triggering water regulation mechanism caused by enzymes. Leaf structure, elastic modulus (Em), leaf tensity (LT) and leaf density (LD) were determined with detached leaves of Broussonetia papyrifera (L.) Vent. and Morus alba L. at each water loss moment (0, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 h). The coupling model between gripping force and LT was established using the Gibbs free energy equation, and the initial LT was determined. The intracellular water availability of M. alba decreased at 4 h, which was earlier than that of B. papyrifera. The intracellular water availability of M. alba was more sensitive than B. papyrifera. Broussonetia papyrifera adapted to dehydration by shrinking its mesophyll cells to offset the water loss, or triggering water regulation mechanism caused by enzymes, i.e., carbonic anhydrase. The sponge parenchyma of B. papyrifera at 3 h decreased by 25.73% of that at control. Morus alba maintained intracellular water availability just by changing the leaf structure. The offset effects through shrinking cells differed between B. papyrifera and M. alba, because the elastic-plastic behavior of their leaves and cells were different. The Em of M. alba was over five-fold higher than that of B. papyrifera. The investigations of water status were more accurate in terms of leaf physical traits instead of water content.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.516
Threshold uncertainty score0.645

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChilean journal of agricultural researchSame topicLeaf Properties and Growth MeasurementFrench-language works237,207