<i>Populus</i> root salicinoid phenolic glycosides are not mobilized to support metabolism and regrowth under carbon-limited conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Remobilization of carbon storage compounds in trees is crucial for the resilience to disturbances, stress, and the requirements of their perennial lifestyle, all of which can impact photosynthetic carbon gain. Trees contain abundant non-structural carbohydrates (NSC) in the form of starch and sugars for long term carbon storage, yet questions remain about the ability of trees to remobilize non-conventional carbon compounds under stress. Aspens, like other members of the genus Populus, have abundant specialized metabolites called salicinoid phenolic glycosides, which contain a core glucose moiety. In this study, we hypothesized that the glucose-containing salicinoids could be remobilized as an additional carbon source during severe carbon limitation. We made use of genetically modified hybrid aspen (Populus tremula x P. alba) with minimal salicinoid content and compared these to control plants with high salicinoid content during resprouting (suckering) in dark (carbon limited) conditions. As salicinoids are abundant anti-herbivore compounds, identification of such a secondary function for salicinoids may provide insight to the evolutionary pressures that drive their accumulation. Our results show that salicinoid biosynthesis is maintained during carbon limitation and suggests that salicinoids are not remobilized as a carbon source for regenerating shoot tissue. However, we found that salicinoid-producing aspens had reduced resprouting capacity per available root biomass when compared to salicinoid-deficient aspens. Therefore, our work shows that the constitutive salicinoid production in aspens can reduce the capacity for resprouting and survival in carbon limited conditions.
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".