Cytotype differences in radial increment provide novel insight into aspen reproductive ecology and stand dynamics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High rates of triploidy have recently been described in quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx.) of the Intermountain West, raising questions about the contributions of triploidy to stand persistence and dynamics. In this study, we investigated cytotype differences between diploid and triploid aspen clones using dendrochronological techniques. We used tree-ring data collected from stems within an aspen stand near Fish Lake, Utah, to test for differences in stem age, population structure, growth, and response to climate. This stand contains the well-known Pando clone, which is purported to be the largest organism documented on earth. Our results show that triploid aspen stems grew more rapidly than diploids, and that this difference was most pronounced early in stand development. Growth response to climate varied little between triploids and diploids, where wide rings were associated with cool, moist years, and narrow rings were associated with above-average growing season temperatures. Stand development processes and inherent genetic differences are mechanisms possibly controlling the observed differences in aspen ring width between triploids and diploids. Regardless of the mechanism, the results have specific management implications. Conventional regeneration methods involving coppicing and the associated intermediate treatments will promote asexually reproducing triploids, leading to static or reduced genetic diversity. Enhanced genetic diversity will be favored by management actions that explicitly account for (i) the potential existence of multiple cytotypes within a stand and (ii) the observed differences in growth rates between diploid and triploid individuals.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".