MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7132937125

On the performance of C4 photosynthesis at low temperatures and its relationship to the ecology of C4 in cool climates

2003· dissertation· W7132937125 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David Stanley Kubien

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2003
Typedissertation
Language
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPhotosynthetic Processes and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotosynthesisRuBisCOPhotoinhibitionC4 photosynthesisPhotorespirationEcosystemPhotosynthetic efficiencyPlant physiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The C4 pathway of photosynthesis occurs in fewer than 4% of plant species, but is often dominant in ecosystems that cover more than 35% of the earth's land area. C4 plants perform poorly under cool, non-freezing conditions, and these species are rare in cool climate habitats. This thesis examines hypotheses regarding the mechanistic basis for this feature of C4 plant ecology. C4 plants have been suggested to be more susceptible to photoinhibition at low temperatures than C3 species. Experiments with the high-latitude C4 grass Muhlenbergia glomerata and the co-occurring C3 species Calamogrostis canadensis indicate that there is no difference in the occurrence of photodamage between these cool-climate species. When grown at low temperatures the C4 plant increases its non-photosynthetic dissipation of light energy, and this dynamic photoinhibition is more detrimental to the carbon gain of M. glomerata than to the C3 species. A fundamental benefit of C4 photosynthesis is that high CO 2 assimilation rates are achieved with less Rubisco than in C3 plants. The in vitro capacity of Rubisco is equivalent to photosynthesis in M. glomerata below approximately 20°C, but exceeds photosynthesis above 5°C in C. canadensis. Using the C4 dicot Flaveria bidentis modified with an antisense construct to have reduced Rubisco (anti-RbcS), it is shown that the enzyme exerts nearly total control of C4 photosynthesis below 15°C, and that this control extends to approximately 25°C if the amount of the enzyme is reduced by 60%. The poor performance of C 4 photosynthesis at low temperatures is due to the lower amount of Rubisco in C4 versus C3 plants. This explanation is consistent with the need for increased photoprotection in response to low growth temperatures. Although their low Rubisco content impairs C4 photosynthesis at low temperatures, some C4 species are able to exploit cool climates. Contrary to expectations, Muhlenbergia glomerata is not restricted to the driest microsites in the fens of boreal Canada, where C4 photosynthesis should be most advantageous. This species is favoured only when flooding reduces the otherwise abundant C3 shrubs, indicating that factors affecting the ecology of cool-climate C4 plants are similar to those occurring in warm habitats.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.261 · 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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicPhotosynthetic Processes and Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→