Radial Growth and Physiological Response of Coniferous Trees to Arctic Amplification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We describe the physiological responses of boreal conifers to climate change for the past 112 years using ring‐width and carbon isotope ratio (δ 13 C) chronologies at six forest sites in northern Eurasia and Canada. Responses differed among regions, depending on their climatic and/or geographic characteristics. Tree radial growth decreased over the past 52 years in central eastern Siberia with the higher rate of summer temperature increase than other regions, as indicated by the negative correlation between radial growth and summer temperature, but increased in northern Europe and Canada. Changes in tree‐ring δ 13 C indicated that recent climatic conditions have induced stronger drought stress for trees from central eastern Siberia than for those from other regions. The observed tree growth trends were compared to those simulated using a dynamic global vegetation model. Although the modeled annual net primary production (NPP) for trees generally exhibited similar decadal variation to radial growth, simulations did not show a recent decrease in tree growth, even in central eastern Siberia. This was probably due to an overestimation of the sensitivity of modeled tree NPP to precipitation. Our results suggest that the tree NPP forecasted under the expected future increases in temperature and average precipitation might be overestimated, especially in severely dry regions such as central eastern Siberia.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".