Tracheid diameter is the key trait determining the extent of freezing-induced embolism in conifers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We tested the hypotheses that freezing-induced embolism is related to conduit diameter, and that conifers and angiosperms with conduits of equivalent diameter will exhibit similar losses of hydraulic conductivity in response to freezing. We surveyed the freeze-thaw response of conifers with a broad range of tracheid diameters by subjecting wood segments (root, stem and trunk wood) to a freeze-thaw cycle at -0.5 MPa in a centrifuge. Embolism increased as mean tracheid diameter exceeded 30 microm. Tracheids with a critical diameter greater than 43 microm were calculated to embolize in response to freezing and thawing at a xylem pressure of -0.5 MPa. To confirm that freezing-induced embolism is a function of conduit air content, we air-saturated stems of Abies lasiocarpa (Hook.) Nutt. (mean conduit diameter 13.7 +/- 0.7 microm) by pressurizing them 1 to 60 times above atmospheric pressure, prior to freezing and thawing. The air saturation method simulated the effect of increased tracheid size because the degree of super-saturation is proportional to a tracheid volume holding an equivalent amount of dissolved air at ambient pressure. Embolism increased when the dissolved air content was equivalent to a mean tracheid diameter of 30 microm at ambient air pressure. Our centrifuge and air-saturation data show that conifers are as vulnerable to freeze-thaw embolism as angiosperms with equal conduit diameter. We suggest that the hydraulic conductivity of conifer wood is maximized by increasing tracheid diameters in locations where freezing is rare. Conversely, the narrowing of tracheid diameters protects against freezing-induced embolism in cold climates.
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".