The responses of Scots pine seedlings to waterlogging during the growing season
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the future management and sustainable use of boreal forests, it is crucial to consider the rate and strength of tree responses to an elevated water table and the concurrent oxygen limitations, especially in peatlands. We examined the response dynamics of 7-year-old Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) seedlings to a 5-week waterlogging (WL) treatment during a growing season in a root lab (dasotron) experiment. WL took place after shoot elongation had ended but while growth of the trunk diameter was still in progress. Trunk sap flow and needle water potential started to decrease immediately after the onset of WL, while the first signs in needle gas exchange — seen as decreases in the potential efficiency of photosystem II, the rates of light-saturated net assimilation and transpiration, and increased needle respiration — were observed after 3 weeks of WL. New needles responded to WL more strongly than the old ones. Drainage with consequent re-oxygenation of the soil caused a further decrease in sap flow. We conclude that through negative feedback on transpiration and net photosynthesis, WL during the growing season is harmful for Scots pine, leading to potential growth losses or even dying of trees within a few weeks of WL.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".