High-resolution analysis of stem increment and sap flow for loblolly pine trees attacked by southern pine beetle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Manual and automated dendrometers, and thermal dissipation probes were used to measure stem increment and sap flow for loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.) trees attacked by southern pine beetle (Dendroctonus frontalis Zimm.) in east Tennessee, USA. Seasonal-long measurements with manual dendrometers indicated linear increases in stem circumference from April through June. Changes in stem circumference slowed after this time, and further increases were either modest or not observed. These effects coincided with a massive midsummer infestation of trees with southern pine beetles. High-resolution measurements with automated dendrometers confirmed that, while early-season increases in radial increment were positive, daily rates of radial increment for slow- and fast-growing trees were largely negative in early to late July. Sap velocity also declined despite favorable weather conditions, but these reductions were not observed until mid-August. Thus, effects on radial increment and stem circumference preceded those on sap velocity by several weeks. The timing of these events, combined with the known developmental rate of southern pine beetles, suggest that disruption of whole-tree water balance is not a prerequisite for the success of attacking beetles or for oviposition by colonizing females and larval development, all of which were completed by early August. Additional field experiments that use high-resolution techniques to measure stem increment and sap flow are needed to more rigorously characterize temporal changes in host physiology during initial invasion and colonization of trees by southern pine beetle.
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) | 0.000 | 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".