White tree rings formed in trembling aspen saplings following experimental defoliation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent studies of trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx.) in western Canada have shown a correlation between past insect defoliation events and the formation of narrow, abnormally pale-coloured ("white") tree rings. The objectives of this study were to test the hypothesis that defoliation causes the formation of white rings and to examine how defoliation affects ring width and density. We experimentally defoliated 7- to 18-year-old aspen in June, July, or August 1997 and subsequently found that white rings were formed the same year in all aspen that were severely defoliated in early June. These white rings were much narrower than in adjacent trees left as controls, and mean xylem density of the white rings (0.27 g·cm3) was significantly reduced relative to normal rings (0.350.40 g·cm3). In the year following defoliation, the tree rings remained narrow, but their appearance and density had returned to normal. Aspen defoliated later in the season formed relatively normal rings in 1997, but ring widths were reduced in 1998. The results confirm that white rings in aspen can be a useful retrospective indicator of the severe, early season defoliation that is typical during major outbreaks of forest tent caterpillar (Malacosoma disstria Hbn.) and other insects.
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".