Integrating environmental and genetic effects to predict responses of tree populations to climate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Climate is a major environmental factor affecting the phenotype of trees and is also a critical agent of natural selection that has molded among-population genetic variation. Population response functions describe the environmental effect of planting site climates on the performance of a single population, whereas transfer functions describe among-population genetic variation molded by natural selection for climate. Although these approaches are widely used to predict the responses of trees to climate change, both have limitations. We present a novel approach that integrates both genetic and environmental effects into a single "universal response function" (URF) to better predict the influence of climate on phenotypes. Using a large lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta Dougl. ex Loud.) field transplant experiment composed of 140 populations planted on 62 sites to demonstrate the methodology, we show that the URF makes full use of data from provenance trials to: (1) improve predictions of climate change impacts on phenotypes; (2) reduce the size and cost of future provenance trials without compromising predictive power; (3) more fully exploit existing, less comprehensive provenance tests; (4) quantify and compare environmental and genetic effects of climate on population performance; and (5) predict the performance of any population growing in any climate. Finally, we discuss how the last attribute allows the URF to be used as a mechanistic model to predict population and species ranges for the future and to guide assisted migration of seed for reforestation, restoration, or afforestation and genetic conservation in a changing climate.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".