MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2936160244 · doi:10.1093/treephys/tpz045

Prediction of temperate broadleaf tree species mortality in arid limestone habitats with stomatal safety margins

2019· article· en· W2936160244 on OpenAlexaff
Zhicheng Chen, Shan Li, Junwei Luan, Yongtao Zhang, Shidan Zhu, Xianchong Wan, Shirong Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueTree Physiology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsTemperate climateAridHabitatTemperate rainforestEcologyTree (set theory)Environmental scienceTemperate forestBiologyEcosystemMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A growing body of evidence highlights the occurrence of increased widespread tree mortality during climate change-associated severe droughts; however, in situ long-term drought experiments with multispecies communities for the prediction of tree mortality and exploration of related mechanisms are rather limited in natural environments. We conducted a 7-year afforestation trial with 20 drought-resistant broadleaf tree species in an arid limestone habitat in northern China, where the species displayed a broad range of survival rates. The stomatal and xylem hydraulic traits of all the species were measured. We found that species' stomatal closure points were strongly related to their xylem embolism resistance and xylem minimum water potential but not to their survival rates. Hydraulic failure of the vascular system appeared to be the main cause of tree mortality, and the stomatal safety margin was a better predictor of tree mortality than the traditionally considered xylem embolism resistance and hydraulic safety margin. We recommend the stomatal safety margin as the indicator for predicting drought-induced tree mortality and for selecting tree species in future forest restorations in arid regions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.379
Threshold uncertainty score0.381

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations22
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTree PhysiologySame topicPlant Water Relations and Carbon DynamicsFrench-language works237,207