MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120119849 · doi:10.1093/treephys/tpq019

Dependence of tree ring stable isotope abundances and ring width on climate in Finnish oak

2010· article· en· W2120119849 on OpenAlexaff
Emmi Hilasvuori, Frank Berninger

Bibliographic record

VenueTree Physiology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDendrochronologyRing (chemistry)Environmental scienceAtmospheric sciencesPhysical geographyGeographyBiologyChemistryPhysicsPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We measured ring widths and isotopic abundances of carbon, oxygen and hydrogen (delta(13)C, delta(18)O and delta(2)H) from the latewood of tree rings of pedunculate oak (Quercus robur L.) in its distributional northern limit in Southern Finland. Ring width was observed to be related to precipitation and relative humidity but not significantly to temperature. delta(13)C and delta(18)O were significantly related to all studied climatic variables, most strongly to cloud cover. Variations in delta(2)H were discovered to be complex combinations of signals from biochemical and physical processes. The results suggest that oaks in Finland can be used as a source of climate information. delta(18)O was discovered to be especially promising as it showed the strongest climate signal and highest common signal between trees. The relationship between climate and ring width indicates that water availability is the main control of ring radial growth. This is supported by the isotope data. High correlation between delta(13)C and delta(18)O time series indicates that photosynthetic carbon assimilation is limited by stomatal control. Therefore, in contrast to the expected temperature limitation, our data indicate that drought limits oak growth more than cold temperatures on the border of its northernmost distribution range.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.747
Threshold uncertainty score0.345

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.206 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTree PhysiologySame topicPlant Water Relations and Carbon DynamicsFrench-language works237,207