The effect of crown position and tree age on resin-canal density in Scots pine (<i>Pinus sylvestris</i> L.) needles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resin canals are an important taxonomic characteristic in conifers. In this paper we examined within- and between-needle variation of the cross-sectional number of resin canals in Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.). Variation within needles was determined from 12 free-hand sections taken along the whole length of foliage collected from a common crown position. The effect of crown location and tree age on resin-canal density was also examined from the midpoint cross sections of 450 Scots pine needles collected from interior and exterior locations from the top, middle, and bottom of 25 crowns of trees ranging in age from 8 to 70 years. Within-needle resin-canal density varied with needle length. Two resin canals were typical for the basal and the terminal needle cross sections. There were 3.2 and 8.6 resin canals for cross sections taken from 10 and 30% of the needle length from the basal sheath, respectively. Resin-canal density was largest, and relatively constant, between 30 and 80% of the needle length. We found significant differences in the cross-sectional number of needle resin canals, as influenced by crown positions and tree age. Resin-canal density increased with foliage height. Foliage from the top one-third of crowns had significantly more resin canals than foliage from the bottom. Foliage collected from the crown interior (proximal to the stem) had fewer resin canals than samples from the crown edge. Resin-canal density increased from 7.1 to 10.3 as tree age increased from 8 to 70 years. These results suggest that crown position and tree age need to be incorporated into the sampling protocols used to establish species standards in resin-canal density, at least for Scots pine, if meaningful comparisons are to be made.Key words: resin canal, needle age, crown position, needle anatomy, Pinus sylvestris.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".