Light and salinity affect growth of the salt marsh plant<i>Aster laurentianus</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
• The effects are reported of substrate salinity and light on the relative growth rate of the annual Aster laurentianus, an endangered species of eastern Canadian salt marshes. • The independent and combined effects of photosynthetically active photon flux density and salinity on the relative growth rate (RGR) and overall plant performance were measured in glasshouse and growth-chamber experiments on seedlings of A. laurentianus. • Low light availability decreased RGR through its negative effect on unit leaf rate. However, specific leaf area and leaf mass ratio varied inversely with changes in light, such that leaf area ratio did not differ greatly among light levels. High salinity decreased RGR by reducing unit leaf rate and leaf area ratio; a reduction in the latter was brought about by a lower leaf mass ratio rather than by a lower specific leaf area. Low light availability combined with high substrate salinity affected A. laurentianus in a strictly additive manner; there was no significant interaction between the two factors on overall plant performance. • Light and salinity are important factors controlling growth of A. laurentianus, and might explain the distribution pattern of the species in the field.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".