MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951425178 · doi:10.1139/cjb-2019-0010

Coordination of leaf and stem traits in 25 species of Fagaceae from three biomes of East Asia

2019· article· en· W2951425178 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kiyosada Kawai, Naoki Okada

Bibliographic record

VenueBotany · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCenter for Ecological Research, Kyoto UniversityJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceUniversity of the Ryukyus
KeywordsBiologyBiomeTemperate climateFagaceaeEcologyTraitTemperate forestTemperate rainforestEast AsiaBotanyEcosystemGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has been debated whether leaf and stem economics spectra are coordinated across species, because previous studies have provided contradictory results. These studies have been restricted to single biomes, and we hypothesize that climate seasonality may determine the strength of coordination between leaf and stem trait combinations. Herein, using 25 Fagaceae species from East Asia, we investigated the coordination of 16 leaf traits and 5 stem traits across and within three biomes (cool temperate, warm temperate, and tropical forests). The traits were chosen to reflect multiple aspects of plant adaptive strategies, such as water, carbon, and nutrient use. The leaf and stem traits of species that reflect resource-use strategies for different resources were functionally coordinated, forming a single axis of trait variation across biomes. This axis represents the trade-off between fast and slow resource-use strategies. We found the trend that the coordination between leaf and stem traits was the strongest in cool temperate forests after removing two Fagus species, followed by warm temperate forests, but was not observed in tropical forests. Our results support the proposed model that plants vary from slow to fast resource exploitation, using closely related species, and suggest that temperature modulates the coordination of leaf and stem economics spectra.

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 score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.211

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 head0.206
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations15
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBotanySame topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207