The water relations of two tropical rainforest species (<em>Virola surinamensis</em> and <em>Eperua falcata</em>): Is <em>Virola</em> unusual as previously reported?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to examine the water relations and hydraulic architecture and vulnerability to cavitation in Virola surinamensis and V. michelii and to compare to similar measurements in Eperua falcata. In several previous reports Virola was seen to have a rather narrow range of xylem pressure potentials (Ψx) near zero in the course of a wet-season day while having water fluxes quite close to Eperua. We tested the hypothesis that the narrow range of Ψx might be consistent with very high hydraulic conductivities of stems, roots and shoots and high vulnerability to cavitation in Virola compared to Eperua. When this hypothesis proved false we concluded that the previous determinations of Ψx might be wrong in Virola due to latex. We re-examined the determination of Ψx in Virola by the pressure chamber technique and compared results to determination of Ψleaf by the thermocouple psychrometer technique and found that the likely range of Ψx are more negative than previously reported. Problems concerning the determination of Ψx in species with latex are discussed.
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 | 0.001 | 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".