MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977593722 · doi:10.1139/b00-096

Leaf anatomy and chlorophyll content of 12 woody species in contrasting light conditions in a Bornean heath forest

2000· article· en· W1977593722 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kun‐Fang Cao

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Botany · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Diversity and Evolution
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversiti Brunei Darussalam
KeywordsPalisade cellChlorophyllBiologyRainforestSpongy tissueBotanyChlorophyll aTemperate climateAcclimatizationPhotosynthesisShade toleranceSpecific leaf areaTropical rainforestHorticultureCanopy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reports the anatomy, chlorophyll content, and some optical properties of leaves of 12 tree species in sun and shade conditions in a tropical heath forest in Brunei (northern Borneo). These plants displayed some xeromorphic leaf features, e.g., relatively low stomata density compared with lowland rain forest plants and sun leaves usually with two or more layers of palisade cells. Most species displayed substantial plasticity in leaf structure and chlorophyll concentration in response to different light conditions. Dipterocarp leaves had thinner palisade mesophyll and greater spongy to palisade thickness ratios than non-dipterocarp leaves. The chlorophyll content per unit leaf area of the species studied was within the range quoted for American tropical rainforest trees. Their chlorophyll a : chlorophyll b ratios, however, were much lower than those for forest plants in humid temperate and subtropical regions. This could be attributed to the regular soil water deficits of this forest. Despite large variation in leaf structure and chlorophyll concentration among species and within species on the two distinct conditions, their absorptance of photosynthetic active light was similar. Chlorophyll concentration per unit weight was adversely and nonlinearly related to leaf thickness for the data pooled from all species in both light conditions (R 2 = 0.49, P < 0.001).Key words: chlorophyll concentration, leaf anatomy, kerangas, light acclimation, leaf plasticity, tropical heath forest.

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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.155 · 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

Citations122
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of BotanySame topicPlant Diversity and EvolutionFrench-language works237,207