Impact of different levels of water deficit on physiological and fluorescence responses in <i>Eucalyptus urophylla × Eucalyptus grandis</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study evaluated the physiological responses of Eucalyptus urophylla × Eucalyptus grandis under varying water stress levels and their recovery post-rehydration. Plants were exposed to control, light (LS), and moderate (MS) water stress treatments in an open area, with continuous monitoring of meteorological conditions. Physiological parameters, including net photosynthesis, stomatal conductance, transpiration, and the Crop Water Stress Index (CWSI), were assessed. Mini-lysimeters measured cumulative plant transpiration. Results showed that predawn leaf water potential ( Ψpd) declined by approximately 196% under LS and 599% under MS compared to the control (−0.2), reflecting significant stress, alongside an increased CWSI due to stomatal closure and higher leaf temperatures. Water stress significantly reduced gas exchange variables, notably photosynthesis, which showed quicker recovery after rehydration compared to transpiration and stomatal conductance. Changes in the photochemical fluorescence parameter qP(3), defined as the coefficient of photochemical quenching measured at the third saturation pulse during fluorescence induction, reflected adjustments in photochemical activity. Five days post-rehydration, plants exhibited partial recovery, with photosynthesis regaining more rapidly than other gas exchange processes. Overall, the study underscores that water stress heavily impairs in E. urophylla × E. grandis physiological processes, though photosynthesis recovers more readily than transpiration and stomatal conductance, depending on stress severity.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".