Asynchronicity in root and shoot phenology in grasses and woody plants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Phenology is central to understanding vegetation response to climate change, as well as vegetation effects on plant resources, but most temporal production data is based on shoots, especially those of trees. In contrast, most production in temperate and colder regions is belowground, and is frequently dominated by grasses. We report root and shoot phenology in 7‐year old monocultures of 10 dominant species (five woody species, five grasses) in southern Canada. Woody shoot production was greatest about 8 weeks before the peak of root production, whereas grass shoot maxima preceded root maxima by 2–4 weeks. Over the growing season, woody root, and grass root and shoot production increased significantly with soil temperature. In contrast, the timing of woody shoot production was not related to soil temperature ( r =0.01). The duration of root production was significantly greater than that of shoot production (grasses: 22%, woody species: 54%). Woody species produced cooler and moister soils than grasses, but growth forms did not affect seasonal patterns of soil conditions. Although woody shoots are the current benchmark for phenology studies, the other three components examined here (woody plant roots, grass shoots and roots) differed greatly in peak production time, as well as production duration. These results highlight that shoot and root phenology is not coincident, and further, that major plant growth forms differ in their timing of above‐ and belowground production. Thus, considering total plant phenology instead of only tree shoot phenology should provide a better understanding of ecosystem response to climate change.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 teacher head, 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".