Changes in specific leaf area and photosynthetic nitrogen-use efficiency associated with physiological acclimation of two hybrid poplar clones to intraclonal competition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Photosynthesis is the most important process driving productivity, and its acclimation to intraclonal competition is not well understood in hybrid poplars. The aim of this study was to examine the physiological response of the crown of two hybrid poplar clones, BT747215 ( Populus balsamifera L. × Populus trichocarpa Torr. & A. Gray) and MB915319 ( Populus maximowiczii A. Henry × P. balsamifera ), to intraclonal competition. We measured light-saturated photosynthesis (Amax), leaf N content on an area basis (Narea), specific leaf area (SLA), and photosynthetic N-use efficiency (PNUE) for three successive growing seasons on trees planted at three spacings (1 m × 1 m, 3 m × 3 m, and 5 m × 5 m). Crowns were sampled at 10 locations corresponding to vertical and horizontal subdivisions. Significant changes took place at the crown level in the closest spacing (1 m × 1 m) compared with the wider spacings (3 m × 3 m and 5 m × 5 m): (i) 30% decrease in Narea, (ii) 20% increase in SLA, and (iii) 40% increase in PNUE. The slope of the Amax–Narea curve was greatest in the closest spacing, indicating a greater change in Amax per unit change in Narea. The two hybrid poplar clones had a similar morphophysiological response to changes of spacing. Both clones showed physiological acclimation of their foliage in response to intraclonal competition through modulation of SLA and PNUE.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".