Successional status and root foraging for phosphorus in seven tropical tree species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, the impact of localized nutrient patches on above- and belowground growth of tropical trees was examined. Seedlings of seven tree species (Albizia guachapele Kunth (Dugand), Cedrela odorata L., Ceiba pentandra (L.) Gaertn., Cordia alliodora (Ruiz & Pavón) Oken, Dalbergia retusa Hemsl., Gliricidia sepium (Jacq.) Kunth ex Walp., and Swietenia macrophylla King) of varying successional status were used in a greenhouse container experiment. Treatments of homogeneous and heterogeneous P fertilization were used to determine each species' ability to forage morphologically for P. In each pot, root length density, average root diameter, and root length to shoot ratio were measured. It was hypothesized that early successional species would be most effective at taking advantage of the heterogeneous soil environment. This prediction was based on studies showing a high degree of soil heterogeneity in early successional forest environments and the need for plants to take advantage of this variability. The study found great variability in the foraging capacity between species, but the hypothesis that successional status and root foraging ability are related was not supported in the species tested. Overall, five of the seven species examined showed some indication that they were taking advantage of local nutrient patches. In four of these species, increased root length density was detected in P patches (A. guachapele, C. odorata, G. sepium, and S. macrophylla) and one species had decreased root width in the P patches (G. sepium). When comparisons were made between homogeneously and heterogeneously fertilized pots, G. sepium and C. alliodora appeared to take advantage of the heterogeneous resource. Both of these species increased aboveground growth in the heterogeneous pots and C. alliodora also had a decreased root to shoot ratio.
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".