Root Foraging Strategy Improves the Adaptability of Tea Plants (Camellia sinensis L.) to Soil Potassium Heterogeneity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Root foraging enables plants to obtain more soil nutrients in a constantly changing nutrient environment. Little is known about the adaptation mechanism of adventitious roots of plants dominated by asexual reproduction (such as tea plants) to soil potassium heterogeneity. We investigated root foraging strategies for K by two tea plants (low-K tolerant genotype "1511" and low-K intolerant genotype "1601") using a multi-layer split-root system. Root exudates, root architecture and transcriptional responses to K heterogeneity were analyzed by HPLC, WinRHIZO and RNA-seq. With the higher leaf K concentrations and K biological utilization indexes, "1511" acclimated to K heterogeneity better than "1601". For "1511", maximum total root length and fine root length proportion appeared on the K-enriched side; the solubilization of soil K reached the maximum on the low-K side, which was consistent with the amount of organic acids released through root exudation. The cellulose decomposition genes that were abundant on the K-enriched side may have promoted root proliferation for "1511". This did not happen in "1601". The low-K tolerant tea genotype "1511" was better at acclimating to K heterogeneity, which was due to a smart root foraging strategy: more roots (especially fine roots) were developed in the K-enriched side; more organic acids were secreted in the low-K side to activate soil K and the root proliferation in the K-enriched side might be due to cellulose decomposition. The present research provides a practical basis for a better understanding of the adaptation strategies of clonal woody plants to soil nutrient availability.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".