Interactions of airborne methyl jasmonate with vegetative storage protein gene and protein accumulation and biomass partitioning in<i>Populus</i>plants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In young poplar (Populus nigra Muench × Populus maximowiczii A. Henry) plants, vegetative storage proteins (VSPs), the bark storage protein (BSP), and (or) wound-inducible 4 protein (WIN4) mRNAs were present in the apical and basal leaves and in the basal leaves, respectively. VSPs accumulated in the apical leaves and to a lesser extent in the stem. The response of the plants to 20 µM airborne methyl jasmonate (MJ) was examined in four parts ( apical and basal leaves, stem, and roots) in both short-term (within 72 h) and long-term (1, 2, 3, and 4 weeks) experiments. In the short-term, MJ-treated plants either induced or increased the part-specific expression of win4 and bsp, and accumulation of BSP and (or) WIN4. In the long-term, MJ treatment resulted in part-specific alterations in protein and nitrogen concentration and further altered BSP and WIN4 accumulation. The MJ-treated plants increased both the biomass allocation to the stem, without a change in the relative growth rate, and the tolerance low temperature (-2°C). Together, these results suggest the BSP and WIN4 are both involved in short-term N cycling and that exogenous MJ treatment promotes changes in nitrogen metabolism in poplar.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".