Effects of competition control and annual nitrogen fertilization on gas exchange of different-aged <i>Pinus taeda</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To determine the importance of competition control and annual fertilization on leaf gas exchange, light-saturated net photosynthesis (Asat), stomatal conductance (gs), and internal CO2 concentration (Ci) were measured multiple times in different-aged loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.) stands growing at a Piedmont (BF Grant) and Coastal Plain (Waycross) location in Georgia, U.S.A. At both locations, competition control decreased Asat and gs (Asat from 4.53 to 4.12 µmol·m2·s1, gs from 0.058 to 0.050 mol·m2·s1 at BF Grant; Asat from 4.22 to 4.01 µmol·m2·s1, gs from 0.054 to 0.049 mol·m2·s1 at Waycross). Overall, fertilization did not have a positive impact on Asat, even though fertilization significantly increased foliar nitrogen concentration. At BF Grant, fertilization significantly decreased gs from 0.057 to 0.051 mol·m2·s1 and Ci from 217 to 205 µmol·mol1. In addition, the decrease in Ci associated with fertilization became larger with stand age. At Waycross, fertilization decreased Ci from 211 to 203 µmol·mol1 and the interaction between fertilization and stand age was significant for gs and Ci. These results indicate that silivcultural practices that increase resource availability and stand growth did not enhance leaf gas exchange.
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".