A synthesis of radial growth patterns preceding tree mortality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tree mortality is a key factor influencing forest functions and dynamics, but our understanding of the mechanisms leading to mortality and the associated changes in tree growth rates are still limited. We compiled a new pan-continental tree-ring width database from sites where both dead and living trees were sampled (2970 dead and 4224 living trees from 190 sites, including 36 species), and compared early and recent growth rates between trees that died and those that survived a given mortality event. We observed a decrease in radial growth before death in ca. 84% of the mortality events. The extent and duration of these reductions were highly variable (1-100 years in 96% of events) due to the complex interactions among study species and the source(s) of mortality. Strong and long-lasting declines were found for gymnosperms, shade- and drought-tolerant species, and trees that died from competition. Angiosperms and trees that died due to biotic attacks (especially bark-beetles) typically showed relatively small and short-term growth reductions. Our analysis did not highlight any universal trade-off between early growth and tree longevity within a species, although this result may also reflect high variability in sampling design among sites. The intersite and interspecific variability in growth patterns before mortality provides valuable information on the nature of the mortality process, which is consistent with our understanding of the physiological mechanisms leading to mortality. Abrupt changes in growth immediately before death can be associated with generalized hydraulic failure and/or bark-beetle attack, while long-term decrease in growth may be associated with a gradual decline in hydraulic performance coupled with depletion in carbon reserves. Our results imply that growth-based mortality algorithms may be a powerful tool for predicting gymnosperm mortality induced by chronic stress, but not necessarily so for angiosperms and in case of intense drought or bark-beetle outbreaks.
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 | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.003 |
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".