Effects of ice storm canopy gaps on shoot architecture in young sugar maple (<i>Acer saccharum</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
:Crown damage to upper canopy trees during an ice storm in January 1998 in an eastern Ontario woodland increased mean canopy openness (percent open sky) to 23.6% from 8.8% in the previous growing season. The resulting effects of increased light penetration to understory vegetation were recorded for each of four size classes of young sugar maple (Acer saccharum) up to 200 cm tall. We used persistent terminal bud scale scars and leaf scars to identify leader growth, branch growth, and branching intensity (proportion of lateral axillary meristems that produced branches) in the two growing seasons prior to and following the January 1998 ice storm. Leader growth showed no differences between the two growing seasons prior to the ice storm for any of the size classes except the 25–50 cm size class, which had less growth in 1997 than in 1996. The magnitude of response in both leader growth and branching following canopy opening increased with increasing plant size, presumably reflecting the superior position of larger saplings to intercept light (compared with smaller saplings still shaded by the larger saplings). In larger saplings (100–200 cm tall), the effect of canopy opening involved a sequential two-stage response: increased leader growth only in the first growing season, with increased branching delayed until the subsequent year. This pattern of response to canopy gaps in sugar maple saplings may represent a strategy of meristem deployment that approaches an optimal compromise between racing vertically to the canopy and branching laterally to intercept light along the way.
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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".