Soil abiotic and biotic properties constrain the establishment of a dominant temperate tree into boreal forests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Climate warming is expected to cause the poleward and upward elevational expansion of temperate plant species, but non‐climatic factors such as soils could constrain this range expansion. However, the extent to which edaphic constraints on range expansion have an abiotic (e.g. soil chemistry) or biotic (e.g. micro‐organisms) origin remains undetermined. We conducted greenhouse experiments to test if the survival and growth of a major North American temperate tree species, Acer saccharum (sugar maple), is independently or jointly constrained by abiotic and biotic properties of field‐collected soils from within and beyond the species' elevational range. Abiotic factors, particularly low base cation concentrations, were major constraints to seedling establishment in boreal forest soils (beyond the range edge), but insufficient arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal inoculum (biotic factor) also strongly reduced seedling performance in these soils. Synthesis. Our results suggest that forecasting future changes in forest composition under climate warming requires consideration of soil properties as well as the mycorrhizal status of tree species.
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".