Abiotic and biotic factors controlling fine root biomass, carbon and nutrients in closed-canopy hybrid poplar stands on post-agricultural land
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fine roots (diameter <2 mm) have a pivotal role in resource acquisition, symbiosis development, and for elemental cycling in forests. Various abiotic and biotic factors affect their biomass and nutrient content. Understanding the effect of these factors on root traits could improve biogeochemical modelling, nutrient management and ecosystem services provision in planted forests. Data from 14-year old poplars planted along a fertility/climatic gradient in Southeastern Canada, show that live fine root biomass varied with genotype and environment, was negatively correlated to soil fertility, and uncorrelated to tree size. Dead fine root biomass varied with genotype and peaked during fall and in colder environments with slower element cycling. Root chemistry also varied with environment, genotype and season. The genotype producing recalcitrant leaf litter had the highest root biomass, suggesting a compensation strategy. Along the studied gradient, plasticity level observed for some root traits (biomass, element contents) was genotype-specific and high for some genotypes. Regionally, such plasticity patterns should be considered in elemental budgets, for nutrient management and ecosystem services provision in plantations (carbon storage, nutrient retention). The small inter-site aboveground productivity differences observed suggest that plasticity in fine root growth may contribute to overcome nutrient limitations on less fertile marginal lands.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".