Spring and summer hydraulic conductivity of 14 woody species of the sub-boreal forest in British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Four hydraulic properties of the xylem, the Huber value (HV), hydraulic conductivity (Kh), and specific (Ks) and leaf-specific hydraulic conductivity (K1) were studied during the spring before leaf-out and during the summer after full leaf-out for 14 co-occurring tree and shrub species in the sub-boreal mixedwood forests of central British Columbia. The 14 studied species were divided into deciduous and evergreen angiosperm and gymnosperm groups, including one deciduous gymnosperm species, the tamarack, Larix laricina (Du Roi) K. Koch. I tested whether species with different life forms and classification divisions have different hydraulic properties. HVs were statistically similar for all angiosperms but significantly different among gymnosperms. Long-lived, late-successional species had higher HVs than pioneer and early-successional species. Ks and K1 values for all species except one, subalpine fir, Abies lasiocarpa var. lasiocarpa (Hook.) Nutt., were significantly higher in the spring than in the summer. Conductivity was higher in angiosperms than in gymnosperms in both the spring and the summer, and was highest in deciduous species in both seasons. The results indicate that requirements for mechanical strength may account for the high HVs in conifers, and that the high HVs compensate for low Ks and K1 values. The high hydraulic conductivities observed in the spring coincide with high water availability and high water demand by trees with emerging leaves. The subsequent reduction in Ks and K1 values could be caused by drought-induced embolism and cavitation in early summer.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".