Stomatal factors and vulnerability of stem xylem to cavitation in poplars
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The relationships between the vulnerability of stem xylem to cavitation, stomatal conductance, stomatal density, and leaf and stem water potential were examined in six hybrid poplar (P38P38, Walker, Okanese, Northwest, Assiniboine and Berlin) and balsam poplar (Populus balsamifera) clones. Stem xylem cavitation resistance was examined with the Cavitron technique in well-watered plants grown in the greenhouse. To investigate stomatal responses to drought, plants were subjected to drought stress by withholding watering for 5 (mild drought) and 7 (severe drought) days and to stress recovery by rewatering severely stressed plants for 30 min and 2 days. The clones varied in stomatal sensitivity to drought and vulnerability to stem xylem cavitation. P38P38 reduced stomatal conductance in response to mild stress while the balsam poplar clone maintained high leaf stomatal conductance under more severe drought stress conditions. Differences between the severely stressed clones were also observed in leaf water potentials with no or relatively small decreases in Assiniboine, P38P38, Okanese and Walker. Vulnerability to drought-induced stem xylem embolism revealed that balsam poplar and Northwest clones reached loss of conductivity at lower stem water potentials compared with the remaining clones. There was a strong link between stem xylem resistance to cavitation and stomatal responsiveness to drought stress in balsam poplar and P38P38. However, the differences in stomatal responsiveness to mild drought suggest that other drought-resistant strategies may also play a key role in some clones of poplars exposed to drought stress.
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".