MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2202187019 · doi:10.1139/cjb-2015-0003

Seasonal variation in water sources of the riparian tree species <i>Acer negundo</i> and <i>Betula nigra</i>, southern Appalachian foothills, USA

2015· article· en· W2202187019 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Joseph C. White, William K. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueBotany · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyRiparian zoneBetula pubescensPhenologyAbscissionBotanySeasonalitySoil waterEcologyAceraceaeWoody plantHabitatMaple

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Determining which water sources a plant accesses throughout a year is an important step in understanding how changes in source characteristics affect utilization by plants. Water sources of Acer negundo L. and Betula nigra L. of the foothills of the southern Appalachians Mountains were examined during one full year, including the phenological stages of leaf bolt, flowering, and leaf senescence and abscission. Source utilization was monitored, comparing the isotopic composition of water samples from woody tissue with those of possible water sources at the site. Species used deep ground and shallow soil water, with a greater reliance on deeper sources during the late growing season. Betula nigra was typically more depleted in δ 2 H than all water sources measured, while values from A. negundo were more variable throughout the study. Intraspecifically, isotopic values did not vary monthly or seasonally for either species (P &gt; 0.56), while interspecific values were different for December, January, and July samplings (P &lt; 0.02). Positive relationships occurred between air temperature and isotopic values of both species (P &lt; 0.04), and may reflect increased evaporation from the upper soil layers at warmer temperatures, which both species appeared to use. An inability to sample all sources prevented the application of mixing models and may weaken conclusions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.349

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.166 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBotanySame topicPlant Water Relations and Carbon DynamicsFrench-language works237,207