Simulated winter browsing may lead to induced susceptibility of willows to beavers in spring
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Browsing may lead to an induced resistance or susceptibility of the plant to the herbivore. We tested the effect of winter browsing by Eurasian beavers ( Castor fiber L., 1758) on food quality of holme willows ( Salix dasyclados Wimm.) in and after the following growth season. Shrubs were pruned in February, and new shoots from these (cut) shrubs were compared with those of untreated (uncut) ones in May and November. The shoots were analysed for dry matter, nitrogen, acid detergent fibre, and total phenolics. In May, the leaves from the cut treatment had a better food quality (more water, more nitrogen, and less phenolics) than those from the uncut one. There was in part also a systemic response, with lower total phenolics in both the cut and untreated parts of pruned shrubs (uncut–cut) than in the uncut shrubs. In November, we did not find significant differences in biochemistry of bark among cut, uncut, or uncut–cut treatments. These results are in accordance with a cafeteria experiment in the field: in May the beavers preferred shoots from the cut treatment, but in November they showed no preference. The results suggest that willows invest in compensatory growth rather than a defence response early in the regrowing phase.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".