Chemical and Molecular Characterization of Wound-Induced Suberization in Poplar (Populus alba × P. tremula) Stem Bark
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Upon mechanical damage, plants produce wound responses to protect internal tissues from infections and desiccation. Suberin, a heteropolymer found on the inner face of primary cell walls, is deposited in specific tissues under normal development, enhanced under abiotic stress conditions and synthesized by any tissue upon mechanical damage. Wound-healing suberization of tree bark has been investigated at the anatomical level but very little is known about the molecular mechanisms underlying this important stress response. Here, we investigated a time course of wound-induced suberization in poplar bark. Microscopic changes showed that polyphenolics accumulate 3 days post wounding, with aliphatic suberin deposition observed 5 days post wounding. A wound periderm was formed 9 days post wounding. Chemical analyses of the suberin polyester accumulated during the wound-healing response indicated that suberin monomers increased from 0.25 to 7.98 mg/g DW for days 0 to 28, respectively. Monomer proportions varied across the wound-healing process, with an overall ratio of 2:1 (monomers:glycerol) found across the first 14 days post wounding, with this ratio increasing to 7:2 by day 28. The expression of selected candidate genes of poplar suberin metabolism was investigated using qRT-PCR. Genes queried belonging to lipid polyester and phenylpropanoid metabolism appeared to have redundant functions in native and wound-induced suberization. Our data show that, anatomically, the wounding response in poplar bark is similar to that described in periderms of other species. It also provides novel insight into this process at the chemical and molecular levels, which have not been previously studied in trees.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".