Norway maple displays greater seasonal growth and phenotypic plasticity to light than native sugar maple
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Norway maple (Acer platanoides L), which is among the most invasive tree species in forests of eastern North America, is associated with reduced regeneration of the related native species, sugar maple (Acer saccharum Marsh) and other native flora. To identify traits conferring an advantage to Norway maple, we grew both species through an entire growing season under simulated light regimes mimicking a closed forest understorey vs. a canopy disturbance (gap). Dynamic shade-houses providing a succession of high-intensity direct-light events between longer periods of low, diffuse light were used to simulate the light regimes. We assessed seedling height growth three times in the season, as well as stem diameter, maximum photosynthetic capacity, biomass allocation above- and below-ground, seasonal phenology and phenotypic plasticity. Given the north European provenance of Norway maple, we also investigated the possibility that its growth in North America might be increased by delayed fall senescence. We found that Norway maple had significantly greater photosynthetic capacity in both light regimes and grew larger in stem diameter than sugar maple. The differences in below- and above-ground biomass, stem diameter, height and maximum photosynthesis were especially important in the simulated gap where Norway maple continued extension growth during the late fall. In the gap regime sugar maple had a significantly higher root : shoot ratio that could confer an advantage in the deepest shade of closed understorey and under water stress or browsing pressure. Norway maple is especially invasive following canopy disturbance where the opposite (low root : shoot ratio) could confer a competitive advantage. Considering the effects of global change in extending the potential growing season, we anticipate that the invasiveness of Norway maple will increase in the future.
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".