Diversity in physiological and morphological characteristics of four cottonwood (<i>Populus deltoides </i>var. <i>wislizenii</i>) populations in New Mexico: evidence for a genetic component of variation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A common garden was established using 120 genotypes of Populus deltoides var. wislizenii (S. Wats.) Eckenwalder from four New Mexico populations (Abiquiu, Corrales, Bernardo, and San Antonio) to examine physiological and morphological differentiation within and among populations. All populations were located within the same watershed along the Rio Grande and one of its tributaries, the Rio Chama. In the common garden, I measured physiological and morphological variation during the 1996 and 1997 growing seasons to determine the extent of inter- and intra-population variation in these traits. In addition, because the sex of each source tree from the field was known, I was able to determine if these same traits varied among male, female, and nonreproductive trees. Small but significant differences within and among populations occurred for photosynthesis, transpiration, and stomatal conductance in both years. Leaf morphological traits also differed within and among populations, including leaf size, chlorophyll content, and specific leaf mass. Stomatal conductance differed significantly between female and nonreproductive trees in both years. This study demonstrated the existence of genetic variation in ecophysiological and morphological traits within and among cottonwood populations and among cottonwoods of differing reproductive status within a single watershed.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".