Photosynthetic and morphological responses of white birch, balsam poplar, and trembling aspen to freezing and artificial defoliation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Comparative stress resistance of 1-year-old white birch (Betula papyrifera Marsh.), balsam poplar (Populus balsamifera L.), and trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx.) seedlings was evaluated after exposure to freezing or defoliation. Photosynthesis in leaves surviving freezing (−5 °C) declined immediately after treatment, but nearly fully recovered within 3 weeks. Defoliation did not significantly increase photosynthesis in the remaining leaves. Refoliation occurred after freezing that killed terminal shoots and released current buds from apical dominance, while new leaves of larger size were produced through continuous growth of terminal shoots in 50% or 100% defoliation. Freezing and complete defoliation significantly reduced diameter and height growth in all species, whereas 50% defoliation did not affect growth. These results indicate some of the physiological and morphological responses to foliage loss in broadleaved boreal species that can help to maintain growth and productivity under a warming climate, which may result in more frequent damaging spring frosts and insect defoliation.
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".