Interactive effects of tree size, crown exposure and logging on drought-induced mortality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Large trees in the tropics are reportedly more vulnerable to droughts than their smaller neighbours. This pattern is of interest due to what it portends for forest structure, timber production, carbon sequestration and multiple other values given that intensified El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO) events are expected to increase the frequency and intensity of droughts in the Amazon region. What remains unclear is what characteristics of large trees render them especially vulnerable to drought-induced mortality and how this vulnerability changes with forest degradation. Using a large-scale, long-term silvicultural experiment in a transitional Amazonian forest in Bolivia, we disentangle the effects of stem diameter, tree height, crown exposure and logging-induced degradation on risks of drought-induced mortality during the 2004/2005 ENSO event. Overall, tree mortality increased in response to drought in both logged and unlogged plots. Tree height was a much stronger predictor of mortality than stem diameter. In unlogged plots, tree height but not crown exposure was positively associated with drought-induced mortality, whereas in logged plots, neither tree height nor crown exposure was associated with drought-induced mortality. Our results suggest that, at the scale of a site, hydraulic factors related to tree height, not air humidity, are a cause of elevated drought-induced mortality of large trees in unlogged plots.This article is part of a discussion meeting issue 'The impact of the 2015/2016 El Niño on the terrestrial tropical carbon cycle: patterns, mechanisms and implications'.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".