MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058169633 · doi:10.1111/jvs.12015

Clonal traits outperform foliar traits as predictors of ecosystem function in experimental mesocosms

2012· article· en· W2058169633 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Anne-Kristel Bittebière, Cendrine Mony

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vegetation Science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgence Nationale de la RechercheMcGill University
KeywordsBiologyMesocosmBiomass (ecology)ProductivityEcologyEcosystemPhenotypic traitResource Acquisition Is InitializationTraitForagingPrimary productionPhenotypeGeneticsResource allocationGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Questions Is productivity linked with clonal traits through their indirect effect on competitive interactions? Are clonal traits better predictors of productivity than foliar traits? Location R ennes, F rance. Methods We used a wide‐scale mesocosm experiment based on several assemblages of species differing in clonal traits, and evaluated if the relationship between biomass production and clonal traits is consistent at different ecological scales. Results Results showed that at the individual level, foliar traits were independent from clonal traits in most studied species. Community specific above‐ground net primary productivity was significantly correlated to community‐aggregated values of clonal and foliar traits. Nevertheless, a stronger relationship with clonal traits was indicated, emphasizing a plant foraging strategy along the horizontal plant plane, which was a determinant of community productivity. An inverse relationship between clonal traits and biomass production was observed at the individual and community levels, which was attributed to modifications in resource acquisition processes resulting from competitive interactions. Conclusions We demonstrated that clonal traits are correlated with productivity at the individual and community scales. These traits were indicators of resource acquisition processes mediated through competitive interactions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.123
Threshold uncertainty score0.345

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Vegetation ScienceSame topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207