Physiological and morphological responses of invasive<i>Ambrosia artemisiifolia</i>(common ragweed) to different irradiances
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Invasion by the exotic herb Ambrosia artemisiifolia L. has become a serious agricultural and environmental problem and of increasing research interest as the species continues its southward spread into subtropical regions of China. To better understand the possible physiological and morphological adaptations of A. artemisiifolia in this region, we conducted a greenhouse experiment using seedlings of A. artemisiifolia and a comparative native species, Urena lobata L. (Caesar’s weed), which is an erect annual shrub in the Malvaceae that commonly co-occurs with A. artemisiifolia in open, disturbed habitats in southern China. Seedlings of both plants were grown under four irradiance regimes (10%, 30%, 55%, and 100% irradiance) from 14 May to 13 July 2010. Ambrosia artemisiifolia showed significantly higher total biomass, total leaf area, specific leaf area, relative growth rate, and net assimilation rate but lower leaf mass fraction than U. lobata at the 30%–100% irradiance levels. With decreasing irradiance, A. artemisiifolia significantly increased biomass allocation to stems and decreased allocation to roots. Meanwhile, A. artemisiifolia exhibited higher light-saturated photosynthetic rates and light saturation points with wide variances except at the 10% irradiance treatment. These findings suggest that A. artemisiifolia has generally higher irradiance plasticity for traits pertaining to biomass partitioning, growth, and plant structure than U. lobata. The ability of A. artemisiifolia to tolerate high shade conditions while maintaining high growth rates at elevated irradiance levels may afford it a competitive advantage and may help explain its recent colonization and spread in southern China.
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".