Architectural differences in saplings of temperate versus tropical angiosperms; consequences of the deciduous habit?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The architecture of saplings of temperate deciduous species of the southeastern United States was compared with that of tropical evergreen species of Central America, Borneo, and northeastern Australia. The deciduous species were more planar in the understory than were the tropical species, because of (i) more planar leaf displays within branches, (ii) a high frequency of arching, plagiotropic main stems (associated with greater plasticity in crown symmetry in relation to light), and (iii) a lower height of first branching. The deciduous species also had more planar branches than did subtropical and temperate evergreen angiosperms. This greater planarity in temperate deciduous understories may be associated with the simultaneous positioning of most leaves during a single flush in the spring. In contrast, saplings in tropical understories typically bear multiple leaf cohorts and position new leaves at the peripheries of existing leaf displays. These results and those of other studies suggest that there are adaptive links between plant architecture and phenology. Other factors, such as latitudinal variation in sun angles, may influence crown shape in overstory trees, but did not seem to be involved here, possibly because the filtering effect of the canopy results in smaller latitudinal shifts in understory illumination angles during the growing season. Thus, by favouring the deciduous habit, the cold winters and warm, humid summers of the eastern deciduous biome of North America appear to have had a notable influence on sapling architecture.
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) | 0.001 | 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".