Embolism resistance of three boreal conifer species varies with pit structure
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While tracheid size of conifers is often a good proxy of water transport efficiency, correlations between conifer wood structure and transport safety remain poorly understood. It is hypothesized that at least some of the variation in bordered pit and tracheid structure is associated with both transport efficiency and embolism resistance. Stem and root samples from three boreal Pinaceae species were collected to test this hypothesis. Tracheid and pit anatomy were studied using light microscopy as well as scanning and transmission electron microscopy. While tracheid size explained at least 90% of the variation in specific conductivity for stem and root samples, the strongest correlations with embolism resistance occurred at the pit level. Both torus thickness and depth of the pit chamber showed a linear increase with greater vulnerability to cavitation. Greater embolism resistance was correlated with increasing wood density and tracheid wall reinforcement. A thinner torus may be more flexible and better able to seal the pit aperture. The pit chamber depth is proportional to the distance that the margo needs to deflect for pit aspiration.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it