Molecular and dendrochronological analysis of natural root grafting in <i>Populus tremuloides</i> (Salicaceae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides) is a clonal tree species, which regenerates mostly through root suckering. In spite of vegetative propagation, aspen maintains high levels of clonal diversity. We hypothesized that the maintenance of clonal diversity in this species can be facilitated by integrating different clones through natural root grafts into aspen's communal root system. To verify this hypothesis, we analyzed root systems of three pure aspen stands where clones had been delineated with the help of molecular markers. Grafting between roots was frequent regardless of their genotypes. Root system excavations revealed that many roots were still living below trees that had been dead for several years. Some of these roots had no root connections other than grafts to living ramets of different clones. The uncovered root systems did not include any unique genotypes that would not occur among stems. Nevertheless, acquiring roots of dead trees helps to maintain extensive root systems, which increases the chances of clone survival. Substantial interconnectivity within clones as well as between clones via interclonal grafts results in formation of large genetically diverse physiological units. Such a clonal structure can significantly affect interpretations of diverse ecophysiological processes in forests of trembling aspen.
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 | 0.001 | 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 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".