Interspecific and intraspecific variations in water storage in epiphytic old forest foliose lichens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cyanolichens ( Lobaria hallii , Lobaria retigera , Lobaria scrobiculata , Pseudocyphellaria anomala ) and cephalodial ( Lobaria pulmonaria ) and noncephalodial ( Platismatia glauca ) chlorolichens were sampled in dry open, mesic open, and mesic closed forests in central British Columbia. Specific thallus mass (STM), water-holding capacity (WHC), percent water content at saturation, and thickness of upper cortex, photobiont layer, and medulla plus lower cortex were measured. Whereas STM did not differ much between cyanolichens (9.8 ± 0.1 mg dry mass·cm –2 ) and chlorolichens (8.0 ± 0.1 mg dry mass·cm –2 ), cyanolichens had a WHC (20.3 ± 0.2 mg H 2 O·cm –2 ) that was nearly twice that of the chlorolichens (10.8 ± 0.2 mg H 2 O·cm –2 ). STM and WHC increased with light exposure at the studied sites, presumably as an acclimation to higher evaporation demands. Within species, WHC was strongly coupled to STM and increased substantially faster with STM in cyanolichens, compensating their inability to use humid air to restore photosynthesis. The photobiont layer was two times thicker in cyanolichens, whereas the thickest layer (the hydrophobic medulla) did not differ between cyanolichens and chlorolichens. Most interspecific variation (88.3%) in WHC could be accounted for in a multiple regression model where STM and photobiont to total thickness ratio were the most important independent variables. Photobionts thus play significant roles in the water economy of lichens.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".