Variation in intra‐annual wood formation, and foliage and shoot development of three major Canadian boreal tree species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PREMISE OF THE STUDY: In a warming climate, boreal trees may have adjusted their growth strategy (e.g., onset and coordination of growth among different organs such as stem, shoot, and foliage, within and among species) to cope with the extended growing seasons. A detailed investigation into growth of different organs during a growing season may help us assess the potential effects of climate change on tree growth in the boreal forest. METHODS: The intra-annual growth of stem xylem, shoot tips, and foliage area of Pinus banksiana, Populus tremuloides, and Betula papyrifera was monitored in a boreal forest in Quebec, Canada during the growing season of 2007. Xylem formation was measured at weekly intervals, and shoot elongation and foliage expansion were measured three times per week from May to September. Growth indices for stem, shoot, and foliage were calculated and used to identify any climate-growth dependence. KEY RESULTS: The time periods required for stem growth, branch extension, and foliage expansion differed among species. Of the three species, P. banksiana had the earliest budburst (20 May) yet the latest completion date of the foliage growth (2 August); P. tremuloides had the latest budburst (27 May) yet the earliest completion date of the foliage growth (10 July). Air temperature positively affected shoot extension growth of all three species. Precipitation positively influenced stem growth of the two broadleaf species, whereas growing season temperature positively impacted stem growth of P. banksiana. CONCLUSION: The results show that both the timing of growth processes and environmental dependences differ among co-occurring species, thereby leading to different adaptive capability of these boreal tree species 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 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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".