Does increased air humidity affect stomatal morphology and functioning in hybrid aspen?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study investigated the effects of exposure to increased relative air humidity (RH) on stomatal morphology and sensitivity to stomata closure inducing stimulus (low RH) in hybrid aspen (Populus tremula L. × P. tremuloides Michx.) coppice growing in field conditions. Artificially elevated RH reduced air vapour pressure deficit by 5%–10% and altered stomatal sensitivity; trees grown under high RH exhibited stronger stomatal response to decreasing air humidity. We found no difference in mean stomatal pore length between treatments and a small decline in stomatal density under humidification. The lack of correlation between stomatal sensitivity and morphological traits suggests that stomatal sensitivity was unaffected by stomatal morphology. In light of rising atmospheric humidity predicted for high latitudes, strict stomatal control over water loss might be beneficial for trees if drought events become more frequent in the future. However, our experiment revealed that about two-thirds of the leaf-to-air vapour pressure difference (VPD L ) response curves demonstrated the opposite pattern, i.e., stomatal opening in response to increasing VPD L . Strict stomatal regulation is probably not beneficial to fast-growing aspen coppice under low RH, as this trait may restrict their carbon gain and growth rate.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".