Effects of elevated carbon dioxide concentration and soil temperature on the growth and biomass responses of mountain maple (Acer spicatum) seedlings to light availability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Some shade-tolerant understory tree species such as mountain maple (Acer spicatum L.) exhibit light-foraging growth habits. Changes in environmental conditions, such as the rise of carbon dioxide concentration ([CO2]) in the atmosphere and soil warming, may affect the performance of these species under different light environments. We investigated how elevated [CO2] and soil warming influence the growth and biomass responses of mountain maple seedlings to light availability. The treatments were two levels of light (100% and 30% of the ambient light in the greenhouse), two [CO2] (392 µmol mol−1 (ambient) and 784 µmol mol−1(elevated)) and two soil temperatures (Tsoil) (17 and 22°C). After one growing season, we measured seedling height, root collar diameter, leaf biomass, stem biomass and root biomass. We found that under the ambient [CO2], the high-light level increased seedlings height by 70% and 56% at the low Tsoil and high Tsoil, respectively. Under the elevated [CO2], however, the high-light level increased seedling height by 52% and 13% at the low Tsoil and high Tsoil, respectively. The responses of biomasses to light generally followed the response patterns of height growth under both [CO2] and Tsoil and the magnitude of biomass response to light was the lowest under the elevated [CO2] and warmer Tsoil. The results suggest that the elevated [CO2] and warmer Tsoil under the projected future climate may have negative impact on the colonization of open sites and forest canopy gaps by mountain maple.
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".