Seasonal variation in biomass and carbohydrate partitioning of understory sugar maple (Acer saccharum) and yellow birch (Betula alleghaniensis) seedlings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated seasonal patterns of biomass and carbohydrate partitioning in relation to shoot growth phenology in two age classes of sugar maple (Acer saccharum Marsh.) and yellow birch (Betula alleghaniensis Britt.) seedlings growing in the understory of a partially harvested forest. The high root:shoot biomass ratio and carbohydrate concentration of sugar maple are characteristic of species with truncated growth patterns (i.e., cessation of aboveground shoot growth early in the growing season), a conservative growth strategy and high shade tolerance. The low root:shoot biomass ratio and carbohydrate concentration of yellow birch are characteristic of species with continuous growth patterns, an opportunistic growth strategy and low shade tolerance. In both species, starch represented up to 95% of total nonstructural carbohydrates and was mainly found in the roots. Contrary to our hypothesis, interspecific differences in shoot growth phenology (i.e., continuous versus truncated) did not result in differences in seasonal patterns of carbohydrate partitioning. Our results help explain the niche differentiation between sugar maple and yellow birch in temperate, deciduous understory forests.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".