Critical temperatures for xylogenesis in conifers of cold climates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Aim To identify temperatures at which cell division and differentiation are active in order to verify the existence of a common critical temperature determining growth in conifers of cold climates. Location Ten European and Canadian sites at different latitudes and altitudes. Methods The periods of cambial activity and cell differentiation were assessed on a weekly time‐scale on histological sections of cambium and wood tissue collected over 2 to 5 years per site from 1998 to 2005 from the stems of seven conifer species. All data were compared with daily air temperatures recorded from weather stations located close to the sites. Logistic regressions were used to calculate the probability of xylogenesis and of cambium being active at a given temperature. Results Xylogenesis lasted from May to October, with a growing period varying from 3 to 5 months depending on location and elevation. Despite the wide geographical range of the monitored sites, temperatures for onset and ending of xylogenesis converged towards narrow ranges with average values around 4–5, 8–9 and 13–14 °C for daily minimum, mean and maximum temperature, respectively. On the contrary, cell division in the cambium stopped in July−August, when temperatures were still high. Main conclusions Wood formation in conifers occurred when specific critical temperatures were reached. Although the timing and duration of xylogenesis varied among species, sites and years, the estimated temperatures were stable for all trees studied. These results provide biologically based evidence that temperature is a critical factor limiting production and differentiation of xylem cells in cold climates. Although daily temperatures below 4−5 °C are still favourable for photosynthesis, thermal conditions below these values could inhibit the allocation of assimilated carbon to structural investment, i.e. xylem growth.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".