This readme.txt file was generated on 2023/11/13 by Jessica Savage ------------------- GENERAL INFORMATION ------------------- 1. Title of Dataset Data on tissue injury and conductivity of flowers at different temperatures along with method validation 2. Author Information First Author Contact Information Name: Jessica A. Savage Institution: University of Minnesota Address: 1035 Kirby Drive, 207 Swenson Science Building, Duluth, MN 55812 Email: jsavage@d.umn.edu ORCID: 0000-0002-7756-7166 3. Date of data collection (single date, range, approximate date) 2017/03/01-2023/8/17 4. Geographic location of data collection (where was data collected?): Bagley Nature Area, Duluth, MN —(46.8241° N, 92.0868° W) University of Minnesota Duluth Campus, Duluth, MN —(46° 49' 10.25" N, 92° 04' 54.12" W) 5. Information about funding sources that supported the collection of the data: National Science Foundation (IOS:1656318), the Grant-in-Aid program provided by the Office of the Vice President of Research -------------------------- SHARING/ACCESS INFORMATION -------------------------- 1. Licenses/restrictions placed on the data: Manuscript copyright held Jessica Savage with a Creative Commons License. Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 United States (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/us/) 2. Links to publications that cite or use the data: Savage publication forthcoming. 3. Links to other publicly accessible locations of the data: None 4. Links/relationships to ancillary data sets: None 5. Was data derived from another source? If yes, list source(s): No 6. Recommended citation for the data: Savage, Jessica A.; Olson, Mady; Sydney, Hudzinski. (2023). Data on tissue injury and conductivity of flowers at different temperatures along with method validation. Retrieved from the Data Repository for the University of Minnesota, https://doi.org/10.13020/k4xq-ab91. --------------------- DATA & FILE OVERVIEW --------------------- 1. File List A. Filename: Maximum_injury Short description: This file contains data on the maximum freezing injury measured in flowers of six species when an autoclave was used as the control for complete tissue death. B. Filename: Wilted_and_nonwilted_conductivity Short description: This file contains data on the conductivity of wilted and non-wilted flowers of Petunia x atkinsiana. C. Filename: Mesh_and_no_mesh Short description: This file contains data on the conductivity of flowers of Petunia x atkinsiana that are floating in water versus those that are kept submerged with a mesh disk. D. Filename: Temperature_response_curves Short description: This file contains data for temperature response curves of flowers from four species. E. Filename: Pollen_conductivity Short description: This file contains data on the relationship between pollen mass and conductivity. F. Filename: Floral_number_versus_conductivity Short description: This file contains data on the relationship between floral number and conductivity in Acer rubrum. G. Filename: Floral_size_versus_conductivity Short description: This file contains data on the relationship between floral surface area, floral mass, and conductivity in Forsythia “Meadowlark”. 2. Relationship between files: All files were collected for a paper on using electrolyte leakage to assess freezing damage in flowers. 3. Additional related data collected that was not included in the current data package: None 4. Are there multiple versions of the dataset? No -------------------------- METHODOLOGICAL INFORMATION -------------------------- 1. Description of methods used for collection/generation of data: All datasets employed the same base protocol. Each part of the protocol is outlined below. A full protocol is available in the published paper. A. Conductivity A set number of flowers that is described in each dataset was cut off an individual plant at the base of each flower and placed in 15 mL of water in a test tube. The pedicel was not included in the sample. The sample was incubated at 23C in a shaking water bath for 23-25 hours. Afterwards, the samples were inverted 2-3 times and the conductivity of the solution was measured using an Oakton PC 700 Benchtop meter (Environmental Express, Charleston, South Carolina, U.S.A.). B. Control treatment Flowers were cut off an individual plant at the base of the flower underwater and placed in floral tube with the pedicel in water. Samples were kept in a refrigerator at 4C for the length of the temperature treatment. Afterwards, conductivity was measured as described above to determine the conductivity of the temperature treatment (L0). C. Temperature treatment Flowers were cut off an individual plant at the base of the flower underwater and placed in floral tube with the pedicel in water. Samples were put in a Programmable freezer (Tenney TUJR, Thermal Product Solutions, White Deer, Pennsylvania USA) and the temperature ramped down to a minimum temperature at a rate of 4C per hour. The samples were kept at the minimum temperature for 3 hours and then warmed at the same rate they were cooled at. Afterwards, conductivity was measured as described above to determine the conductivity of the temperature treatment (Lt). D. Complete tissue death treatment After conductivity was measured in the temperature and control treatments, the samples were placed in a -80C freezer for 24 hours. Then they were removed and allowed to thaw on the bench for 30 minutes before putting in a shaking water bath. The water bath was kept at 23C, and the samples were incubated for an additional 24 hours. Afterwards the final set of conductivity measurements were taken to determine the conductivity of the dead tissue in the control (Ld) and the temperature treatment (Lk). 2. Methods for processing the data: NA 3. Instrument- or software-specific information needed to interpret the data: NA 4. Standards and calibration information, if appropriate: NA 5. Environmental/experimental conditions: All measurements were taken under lab conditions. Samples were either collected outside on the University of Minnesota campus or taken from the greenhouse. 6. Describe any quality-assurance procedures performed on the data: All data entry was triple checked. 7. People involved with sample collection, processing, analysis and/or submission: Jessica Savage, Sydney Hudzinski, Mady Olson, Max Bonfig and Grace Aho ----------------------------------------- DATA-SPECIFIC INFORMATION FOR: Maximum_injury ----------------------------------------- 1. Number of variables: 13 2. Number of cases/rows: 119 3. Missing data codes: NA 4. Variable List A. Name: Species Description: Scientific name of the species B. Name: Date Description: Month and year C. Name: Location Description: Where plant material was growing D. Name: Temp Description: Temperature in Celsius of treatment used to determine the maximum freezing injury. CTL indicates the control samples that were not subjected to a freezing treatment. E. Name: No_flwrs Description: Number of flowers put in tubes with 15mL of water for conductivity measurements. F. Name: L0_uS Description: Conductivity of the control samples after incubating in water for 23-25 hours (L0) measured in uS. Note that for rows with temperature treatment data, L0_uS is an average of the CTL rows because there was not a one-to-one relationship between the control and temperature treatment samples. G. Name: Ld_uS Description: Conductivity of the control samples after complete tissue death resulting from autoclaving(Ld) measured in uS. Note that for rows with temperature treatment data, Ld_uS is an average of the CTL rows because there was not a one-to-one relationship between the control and temperature treatment samples. H. Name: Lt_uS Description: Conductivity of the temperature treatment samples after incubating in water for 23-25 hours (Lt) measured in uS. I. Name: Lk_uS Description: Conductivity of the temperature treatment samples after complete tissue death resulting from autoclaving(Lk) measured in uS. J. Name: Lt/Lk Description: Ratio of Lt_uS divided by Lk_uS K. Name: L0/Ld Description: Ratio of L0_uS divided by Ld_uS L. Name: I(t) Description: Index of injury calculated as (Lt/Lk – L0/Ld)/(1-Lo/Ld) M. Name: Visual Description: Note of whether there was visible tissue browning. ----------------------------------------- DATA-SPECIFIC INFORMATION FOR: Wilted_and_nonwilted_conductivity ----------------------------------------- 1. Number of variables: 4 2. Number of cases/rows: 17 3. Missing data codes: No missing data 4. Variable List A. Name: Date Description: Month and year B. Name: Location Description: Where the material was growing. C. Name: Condition Description: Indicates whether the flowers were fresh/non-wilted or wilted or frozen. D. Name: Conductivity_uS Description: Conductivity of one flower of Petunia x atkinsiana in 15 mL of water after incubating in water for 23-25 hours measured in uS. ----------------------------------------- DATA-SPECIFIC INFORMATION FOR: Mesh_and_no_mesh ----------------------------------------- 1. Number of variables: 3 2. Number of cases/rows: 20 3. Missing data codes: No missing data 4. Variable List A. Name: Date Description: Month, day of year and year in DD-Month_YY format B. Name: Treatment Description: Indicates whether a mesh was used to keep the floral tissue submerged. C. Name: Conductivity_uS Description: Conductivity of one flower of Petunia x atkinsiana in 15 mL of water after incubating in water for 23-25 hours measured in uS. ----------------------------------------- DATA-SPECIFIC INFORMATION FOR: Temperature_response_curves ----------------------------------------- 1. Number of variables: 13 2. Number of cases/rows: 148 3. Missing data codes: 4. Variable List A. Name: Species Description: Scientific name of the species B. Name: Temperature Description: Minimum temperature in Celsius used in the temperature treatment C. Name: Date Description: Month, day of the year and year in DD-Month-YY format. D. Name: Location Description: Where plants were grown E. Name: No_flwrs Description: Number of flowers put in tubes with 15mL of water for conductivity measurements. F. Name: Lt_uS Description: Conductivity of the temperature treatment samples after incubating in water for 23-25 hours (Lt) measured in uS. G. Name: L0_uS Description: Conductivity of the control samples after incubating in water for 23-25 hours (L0) measured in uS. H. Name: Lk_uS Description: Conductivity of the temperature treatment samples after complete tissue death resulting from 24 hours in a -80C freezer(Lk) measured in uS. I. Name: Ld_uS Description: Conductivity of the control samples after complete tissue death resulting from 24 hours in a -80C freezer(Lk) measured in uS. J. Name: Lt/Lk Description: Ratio of Lt_uS divided by Lk_uS K. Name: L0/Ld Description: Ratio of L0_uS divided by Ld_uS L. Name: I(t) Description: Index of injury calculated as (Lt/Lk – L0/Ld)/(1-Lo/Ld) M. Name: Visual Description: Note of whether there was visible tissue browning. ----------------------------------------- DATA-SPECIFIC INFORMATION FOR: Pollen_conductivity ----------------------------------------- 1. Number of variables: 5 2. Number of cases/rows: 24 3. Missing data codes: No missing data 4. Variable List A. Name: Species Description: Scientific name of the species B. Name: Date Description: Month, day of the year and year in M/DD/YYYY format. C. Name: Location Description: Where plants were grown D. Name: Mass_g Description: Mass of pollen put in 15mL of water in grams E. Name: Conductivity_uS Description: Conductivity of pollen after incubating in water for 23-25 hours measured in uS. ----------------------------------------- DATA-SPECIFIC INFORMATION FOR: Floral_number_versus_conductivity ----------------------------------------- 1. Number of variables: 4 2. Number of cases/rows: 44 3. Missing data codes: No missing data 4. Variable List A. Name: Date Description: Month and year B. Name: Location Description: Where plants were grown D. Name: No_flwrs Description: Number of flowers put in the tube E. Name: Conductivity_uS Description: Conductivity of flowers after incubating in 15 mL water for 23-25 hours measured in uS. ----------------------------------------- DATA-SPECIFIC INFORMATION FOR: Floral_size_versus_conductivity ----------------------------------------- 1. Number of variables: 15 2. Number of cases/rows: 18 3. Missing data codes: No missing data 4. Variable List A. Name: Date Description: Month, day of the year, and year in DD-Month-YY format. B. Name: Location Description: Where plants were grown C. Name: No_flwrs Description: Number of flowers put in the tube D. Name: Conductivity_uS Description: Conductivity of flowers after incubating in 15 mL water for 23-25 hours measured in uS. E. Name: P1_length_cm Description: Length of petals from the first flower in cm F. Name: P2_length_cm Description: Length of petals from the second flower in cm G. Name: P3_length_cm Description: Length of petals from the third flower in cm H. Name: P4_length_cm Description: Length of petals from the fourth flower in cm I. Name: P1_area_cm2 Description: Estimate of one-sided area of the petals for flower 1 based on a calibration curve, area = 1.8415 * length – 0.1636 in cm2. The curve was made based on the relationship between area and petal length of thirty flowers. J. Name: P2_area_cm2 Description: Estimate of one-sided area of the petals for flower 2 based on a calibration curve, area = 1.8415 * length – 0.1636 in cm2. The curve was made based on the relationship between area and petal length of thirty flowers. K. Name: P3_area_cm2 Description: Estimate of one-sided area of the petals for flower 3 based on a calibration curve, area = 1.8415 * length – 0.1636 in cm2. The curve was made based on the relationship between area and petal length of thirty flowers. L. Name: P4_area_cm2 Description: Estimate of one-sided area of the petals for flower 4 based on a calibration curve, area = 1.8415 * length – 0.1636 in cm2. The curve was made based on the relationship between area(cm2) and petal length (cm) of thirty flowers. M. Name: Total_area_cm2 Description: Sum of all the petal areas per tube in cm2. N. Name: Total_surf_area_cm2 Description: Twice the total_area_cm2 O. Name: Mass_g Description: Estimate of floral mass for flower 4 based on a calibration curve, mass = 0.0039 * length – 0.0006. The curve was made based on the relationship between mass (g) and petal length (cm) of thirty flowers.