MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6941066553 · doi:10.7939/r3-v7pa-7m37

Cutin and suberin in mixed-wood boreal forest plants and their use as markers for origin of soil organic matter

2020· dissertation· en· W6941066553 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Alberta Library · 2020
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuberinCutinOrganic matterSoil organic matterSoil waterBark (sound)Picea abies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quantifying above and belowground inputs to soil organic matter is important to assess forest soil health and to develop practices that increase the soil organic matter present in forest soils. Cutin and suberin are biopolymers found in leaves and roots, respectively, that protect plants from desiccation. Due to their specific locations within plant tissues, the presence of the polymers cutin and suberin in the soil is used to confirm the contributions of these leaves and roots to organic matter. Specifically, the identity of the monomers comprising these biopolymers is used to infer the contributions of leaves and roots to organic matter. However, previous studies have identified monomers in tissues of leaves or roots that do not concur with published lists of markers, highlighting the importance of using region- and species-specific markers. Cutin and suberin were extracted from leaf, root, and bark samples from the eight most dominant species in a boreal mixed-wood stand in Alberta using hydrolysis. Additionally, I sampled soils from the interface of the organic and mineral soil, treated with the same hydrolysis process to investigate if the monomers present in the plant tissue samples were also detectable in soils. The monomers were identified using GCMS and compared to published lists of cutin and suberin markers. Across the roots and leaves of the eight species, a total of 142 monomers were identified. In soil samples, only 48 monomers were observed, five of which were not present in any of the plant tissues. Due to their presence in other plant tissues aside from leaves and roots, and in microorganisms, several classes of compounds identified in this study cannot determine the origin of soil organic matter. When compared to published lists of cutin and suberin markers, I found that while a select number of markers held true for the samples analysed in this study, others are not appropriate for use in study areas with vegetation similar to the one in this study due to their presence in multiple tissue types. The inconsistencies between the monomers identified in this study and those in published reports highlight the importance of using cutin and suberin markers specific to the dominant species of plants present in the area of interest.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.167
Teacher spread0.160 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Alberta Library→Same topicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions→French-language works237,207→