MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2596154256 · doi:10.3832/ifor2045-009

Successional leaf traits of monsoon evergreen broad-leaved forest, Southwest China

2017· article· en· W2596154256 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jiacan Su

Bibliographic record

VenueiForest - Biogeosciences and Forestry · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of British ColumbiaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsEvergreenEcological successionBiologyEvergreen forestEcologyMonsoonSpecific leaf areaBotanyGeographyPhotosynthesis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding the variation of functional traits of plant species along forest successional gradients may provides useful insights into community assemblages. However, species performance during forest succession is controversial. We explored the variation of leaf traits along a forest succession by examining ten leaf traits in four successional stages in a monsoon evergreen broad-leaved forest in Southwest China. Results showed significant differences in all leaf traits except leaf area and leaf carbon content among the successional stages. Five leaf traits were highly correlated to successional stage, while the first principal component showed no correlation with successional stage. The first principal component accounted for 56.1% of the total variation in all ten leaf traits. Almost 50% of the relationships between leaf traits differed along the examined successional gradient, indicating that leaf traits were affected by the successional stage.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueiForest - Biogeosciences and ForestrySame topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207