MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Conifers in cold environments synchronize maximum growth rate of tree‐ring formation with day length

2006· article· en· W1972773919 on OpenAlexafffund
Sergio Rossi, Annie Deslauriers, Tommaso Anfodillo, Hubert Morin, Antonio Saracino, Renzo Motta, Marco Borghetti

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Phytologist · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicTree-ring climate responses
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinistero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della RicercaFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les Technologies
KeywordsGrowth rateAbies balsameaTaigaXylemLarchGompertz functionBiologyBotanyBorealPicea abiesTracheidTemperate climatephotoperiodismEcologyAtmospheric sciencesAnimal scienceBalsamMathematicsGeometryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intra-annual radial growth rates and durations in trees are reported to differ greatly in relation to species, site and environmental conditions. However, very similar dynamics of cambial activity and wood formation are observed in temperate and boreal zones. Here, we compared weekly xylem cell production and variation in stem circumference in the main northern hemisphere conifer species (genera Picea, Pinus, Abies and Larix) from 1996 to 2003. Dynamics of radial growth were modeled with a Gompertz function, defining the upper asymptote (A), x-axis placement (beta) and rate of change (kappa). A strong linear relationship was found between the constants beta and kappa for both types of analysis. The slope of the linear regression, which corresponds to the time at which maximum growth rate occurred, appeared to converge towards the summer solstice. The maximum growth rate occurred around the time of maximum day length, and not during the warmest period of the year as previously suggested. The achievements of photoperiod could act as a growth constraint or a limit after which the rate of tree-ring formation tends to decrease, thus allowing plants to safely complete secondary cell wall lignification before winter.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations469
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew PhytologistSame topicTree-ring climate responsesFrench-language works237,207