Contrasting acclimation abilities of two dominant boreal conifers to elevated CO<sub>2</sub> and temperature
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract High latitude forests will experience large changes in temperature and CO 2 concentrations this century. We evaluated the effects of future climate conditions on 2 dominant boreal tree species, Pinus sylvestris L. and Picea abies (L.) H. Karst, exposing seedlings to 3 seasons of ambient (430 ppm) or elevated CO 2 (750 ppm) and ambient temperatures, a + 4 °C warming or a + 8 °C warming. Pinus sylvestris responded positively to warming: seedlings developed a larger canopy, maintained high net CO 2 assimilation rates (A net ), and acclimated dark respiration (R dark ). In contrast, carbon fluxes in Picea abies were negatively impacted by warming: maximum rates of A net decreased, electron transport was redirected to alternative electron acceptors, and thermal acclimation of R dark was weak. Elevated CO 2 tended to exacerbate these effects in warm‐grown Picea abies , and by the end of the experiment Picea abies from the +8 °C, high CO 2 treatment produced fewer buds than they had 3 years earlier. Treatments had little effect on leaf and wood anatomy. Our results highlight that species within the same plant functional type may show opposite responses to warming and imply that Picea abies may be particularly vulnerable to warming due to low plasticity in photosynthetic and respiratory metabolism.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 it