Herbivory patterns in mature sugar maple: variation with vertical canopy strata and tree ontogeny
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1. Although leaf morphology and chemistry show profound changes as trees age, the consequences of such changes to herbivory have received little attention, particularly late in the ontogeny of canopy trees. 2. Using a mobile aerial lift for canopy access, patterns of leaf damage were evaluated in canopy‐dominant mature sugar maple ( Acer saccharum Marsh) trees ranging from ∼20 to 70 cm in diameter, corresponding to an age range of ∼40–180 years. 3. Herbivore damage patterns varied in relation to both vertical canopy position (among upper‐, mid‐, and lower‐canopy positions) and with tree size. Damage types attributable to herbivores active on leaf surfaces, including leaf skeletonizers and leaf cutters (both principally Lepidoptera), and leaf stippling inducers (Hemiptera) showed decreases with tree size, and with increasing height in the canopy. In contrast, leaf damage from the most abundant gall‐forming arthropod in the system, the eriophyid mite Vasates aceriscrumena , increased markedly with tree size. 4. The results indicate that herbivory patterns vary with both canopy stratum and with tree size in sugar maple, and that the relative strength of vertical stratification and tree ontogeny effects are similar in magnitude. The predominant patterns are of a decrease in herbivory with increasing height in the canopy and with tree size, but certain galling arthropods exhibit the reverse trends.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.004 | 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".