Variation in foliar nitrogen and aboveground net primary production in young postfire lodgepole pine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding nutrient dynamics of young postfire forests may yield important insights about how stands develop following stand-replacing wildfires. We studied 15-year-old lodgepole pine stands that regenerated naturally following the 1988 Yellowstone fires to address two questions: (1) How do foliar nitrogen (N) concentration and total foliar N vary with lodgepole pine density and aboveground net primary production? (2) Is foliar N related to litter production and to rates of gross production, consumption, and net production of soil NH4+ and NO3–? Foliar N concentration of new lodgepole pine needles averaged 1.38%; only stands at very high density (>80 000 trees·ha–1) approached moderate N limitation. Foliar N concentration in composite (all-age) needles averaged 1.08%, varied among stands (0.87%–1.39%), and declined with increasing tree density. The foliar N pool averaged 48.3 kg N·ha–1, varied among stands (3.6–218.4 kg N·ha–1), and increased with aboveground net primary production. Total foliar N was not related to laboratory estimates of net production of NH4+ or NO3– in soils. Lodgepole pine foliage is a strong N sink, and N does not appear to be limiting at this early successional state. The initial spatial patterns of postfire tree density strongly influence landscape patterns of N storage.
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) | 0.000 | 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".