Sapwood moisture in Douglas-fir boles and seasonal changes in soil water
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Large conifers, such as Douglas-fir ( Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco var. menziesii), purportedly draw on water stored in their boles during periods of summer drought. The relation of seasonal changes in soil moisture to sapwood water content was evaluated in four forest stands dominated by mature Douglas-fir along a transect from the Pacific Coast to 1200 m in the western Cascade Mountains of Oregon, USA. The sites varied in stand age, elevation, topography, and soil characteristics, including available soil water capacity. At two sites, gravimetric measures of sapwood relative water content (SRWC) were taken approximately every 4 weeks from May 2002 through July 2004; two additional sites were similarly measured from February 2003 through July 2004. Automated meteorological stations located on the sites and in adjacent open areas continuously monitored weather and soil moisture. Plant-available soil water (ASW) in the upper 0.6 m of soil reached minimum values during the summer drought and rewetted during fall and winter. Large seasonal changes in ASW did not result in corresponding changes in SRWC. Minimum SRWC was lower at sites with higher ASW. At all sites, Douglas-fir trees apparently regulate water loss to maintain consistent (±10%) bole water content throughout the year despite large changes in soil moisture.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".