High-throughput, dynamic, multi-dimensional: an expanding repertoire of plant respiration measurements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A recent burst of technological innovation and adaptation has greatly improved our ability to capture respiration rate data from plant sources. At the tissue level, several independent respiration measurement options are now available, each with distinct advantages and suitability, including high-throughput sampling capacity. These advancements facilitate the inclusion of respiration rate data into large-scale biological studies such as genetic screens, ecological surveys, crop breeding trials, and multi-omics molecular studies. As a result, our understanding of the correlations of respiration with other biological and biochemical measurements is rapidly increasing. Difficult questions persist concerning the interpretation and utilization of respiration data; concepts such as allocation of respiration to growth versus maintenance, the unnecessary or inefficient use of carbon and energy by respiration, and predictions of future respiration rates in response to environmental change are all insufficiently grounded in empirical data. However, we emphasize that new experimental designs involving novel combinations of respiration rate data with other measurements will flesh-out our current theories of respiration. Furthermore, dynamic recordings of respiration rate, which have long been used at the scale of mitochondria, are increasingly being used at larger scales of size and time to reflect processes of cellular signal transduction and physiological response to the environment. We also highlight how respiratory methods are being better adapted to different plant tissues including roots and seeds, which have been somewhat neglected historically.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".