Tropical trees in a wind‐exposed island ecosystem: height‐diameter allometry and size at onset of maturity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Tropical tree species adapted to high wind environments might be expected to differ systematically in terms of stem allometry and life‐history patterns, as compared with species found in less windy forests. We quantified height‐diameter (H‐D) allometries and relative size at onset of maturity (RSOM) for rain forest tree and tree fern species native to Dominica, West Indies, an island that experiences some of the highest average wind speeds pantropically. H‐D allometries for 17 Dominican angiosperm tree species were strongly concave on a log–log scale with asymptotic heights ranging from 9 to 32 m among species, averaging 25 m for canopy trees. H‐D allometries for species‐pooled data deviated strongly from recorded patterns for other tropical forest trees: asymptotic heights for trees in Dominica were 30–116% lower than those recorded for continental rain forest trees in Australia, South America, Africa and South‐East Asia. In a subset of canopy trees sampled in steep, sheltered valleys, heights were 12–26% larger at a given diameter and approached those observed in other tropical regions, suggesting large phenotypic responses of H‐D allometries to wind conditions. RSOM(quantified as the ratio of height at onset of reproduction to asymptotic maximum height) for Dominican angiosperm species was highly variable, ranging from 0.23 to 0.89 (mean 0.54), similar to patterns observed in Malaysia and Panama; very lowRSOMvalues were estimated for two tree fern species. Pooling data from Dominica with published values from other tropical forests, we observed a significant negative correlation betweenRSOMand wood density. Synthesis. Our data suggest that wind regimes are a critical determinant of height‐diameter (H‐D) allometries of tropical trees at both the local and global scale. Although we found no evidence for a systematic differences in reproductive onset related to wind regime,RSOMwas negatively correlated with species’ wood density, suggesting that more shade‐tolerant tree species show a longer period of gradually increasing reproductive allocation through ontogeny.
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".