Water transport through tall trees: A vertically explicit, analytical model of xylem hydraulic conductance in stems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Trees grow by vertically extending their stems, so accurate stem hydraulic models are fundamental to understanding the hydraulic challenges faced by tall trees. Using a literature survey, we showed that many tree species exhibit continuous vertical variation in hydraulic traits. To examine the effects of this variation on hydraulic function, we developed a spatially explicit, analytical water transport model for stems. Our model allows Huber ratio, stem-saturated conductivity, pressure at 50% loss of conductivity, leaf area, and transpiration rate to vary continuously along the hydraulic path. Predictions from our model differ from a matric flux potential model parameterized with uniform traits. Analyses show that cavitation is a whole-stem emergent property resulting from non-linear pressure-conductivity feedbacks that, with gravity, cause impaired water transport to accumulate along the path. Because of the compounding effects of vertical trait variation on hydraulic function, growing proportionally more sapwood and building tapered xylem with height, as well as reducing xylem vulnerability only at branch tips while maintaining transport capacity at the stem base, can compensate for these effects. We therefore conclude that the adaptive significance of vertical variation in stem hydraulic traits is to allow trees to grow tall and tolerate operating near their hydraulic limits.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".