MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7106801423 · doi:10.14288/cjur.v9i2.199410

Effects of carbon dioxide fertilization and copper exposure on photosynthesis in hornwort

2024· article· en· W7106801423 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Collections · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant responses to elevated CO2
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotosynthesisCeratophyllum demersumCarbon dioxideHuman fertilizationCopperPhotosynthetic efficiency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As global carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions continue rising to unprecedented levels, photosynthetic efficiency of terrestrial plants is also increased. This phenomenon is known as CO2 fertilization. While advantageous to aid in the removal of excess greenhouse gases, CO2 fertilization may be offset by the simultaneous increase in heavy metal pollutants, such as copper, cadmium, lead, and mercury. The purpose of this experiment was to investigate whether heavy metal pollution, modelled through copper II sulfate (CuSO4), may significantly impair CO2 fertilization and photosynthesis in marine plants. We examined the volume of O2 produced and the rates of photosynthesis in Ceratophyllum demersum (hornwort). Plants were placed in tubes of pre-boiled water with dissolved baking soda (NaHCO3) as the CO2 source. There were five treatment groups: no hornwort, hornwort control, hornwort + CO2 fertilization, hornwort + CuSO4, and hornwort + CuSO4 + CO2 fertilization. We found that CO2 fertilization increased O2 production and photosynthetic rate, while the addition of CuSO4 inhibited photosynthesis and the positive effects of CO2 fertilization. These results imply that although CO2 fertilization can increase photosynthesis and eliminate some of the excess CO2 in our atmosphere, this effect will be eliminated if we do not also control the amount of heavy metal pollution ejected into the environment.

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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen CollectionsSame topicPlant responses to elevated CO2French-language works237,207