Effects of soil moisture manipulations on fine root dynamics in a mature balsam fir (Abies balsamea L. Mill.) forest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We tested the hypothesis that moisture stress affects fine root dynamics during and after the stress. To this end, we investigated the effects of soil moisture on annual and seasonal fine root production and mortality over 4 years in a mature balsam fir (Abies balsamea L. Mill.) stand using a minirhizotron and soil coring. Droughting and irrigating treatments were imposed for 17 weeks during the third year of the study, and post-treatment recovery was measured during the fourth year. Monthly fine root production was often reduced by low soil water content (SWC) during July-September in the pre-treatment years and by imposed drought. Irrigation resulted in higher summer fine root production than in pre-treatment years. In the recovery year, increased fine root production was observed in the previously droughted plots despite low SWC in August and September. Droughting decreased year-end fine root biomass in the treatment year, but biomass returned to pre-treatment levels during the recovery year. Droughting and irrigating did not affect foliage production during the treatment and recovery years. Our results suggest that for balsam fir, establishment and maintenance of a functional balance between foliage and fine root biomass, with respect to moisture supply and demand, can depend on fine root dynamics occurring over more than one growing season. In addition, our findings provided insights into tree growth responses to interannual variation in moisture supply.
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 | 0.000 | 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".