Regrowth response of young black spruce (<i>Picea mariana)</i> trees to meristem removal and resource addition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Regrowth of an injured plant may exceed the growth of a noninjured plant (i.e., overcompensation) when (i) dormant meristems are available to replace injured meristems, (ii) the injury level is sufficient to release dormant meristems from apical dominance, and (iii) the supply of mineral nutrient and light is sufficient to support the outgrowth of previously dormant meristems. A field experiment was conducted with 5-year-old black spruce trees to determine whether these three conditions were met when 25%, 50%, or 75% of a tree's uppermost buds were removed. Subsequent shoot growth on treated and nontreated trees (0% meristem removal) was compared for each of two levels of resource supply (natural and enhanced). Enhanced levels of light and mineral nutrients were created by removing neighbouring plants within a 2-m radius of a target tree and adding 10 grams of NPK fertilizer per tree. After 5 and 17 months, shoot growth did not differ significantly among trees in the four meristem removal treatments (condition ii above), regardless of resource supply (condition iii above). The absence of overcompensation most likely reflects the relatively small supply of dormant meristems on treated trees (condition i above).Key words: apical meristem, black spruce, compensatory growth, injury.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".