Development trend, evolution of themes, gaps, and challenges of the research investigating ozone effects on vegetation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tropospheric ozone (O 3 ) is a potent oxidant that can harm plants, making it a key focus of research in ecology and agriculture. However, comprehensive reviews about the developmental history of O 3 research on plants are lacking. This review utilized Citespace software to unveil the evolution of the main research themes over time, which correlated with three distinct developmental periods. During the first period, researchers primarily focused on the impact of O 3 on photosynthesis and plant defense responses. As time progressed, more in-depth investigations were undertaken, including determining the critical levels at which O 3 damage to plants occurred, analyzing the source–sink carbon balance and carbon allocation, assessing food security based on risk evaluation, identifying quantitative trait loci associated with O 3 tolerance, conducting transgenic research, and exploring the combined effect of multiple stressors on vegetation within the context of climate change. Despite these insights, several gaps and challenges remain, that merit future considerations. Greater research efforts should focus on (1) insufficient studies on the combined effects of O 3 , CO 2 , and drought in the context of global warming; (2) intermittent elevated O 3 events and plant recovery mechanisms under low O 3 concentration; (3) reproductive and renewal capacity of species, and t O 3 effects on community stability or composition; (4) updating O 3 flux measurements to reflect effective O 3 flux when O 3 index is applied, and challenges in determining species-specific phytotoxicity threshold; and (5) O 3 -tolerance gene screening and breeding.
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 | 0.001 | 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".