MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3080688640 · doi:10.1111/nph.17572

A starting guide to root ecology: strengthening ecological concepts and standardising root classification, sampling, processing and trait measurements

2021· review· en· W3080688640 on OpenAlexaff
Grégoire T. Freschet, Loïc Pagès, Colleen M. Iversen, Louise H. Comas, Boris Rewald, Catherine Roumet, Jitka Klimešová, Marcin Zadworny, Hendrik Poorter, Johannes A. Postma, Thomas S. Adams, Agnieszka Bagniewska‐Zadworna, A. Glyn Bengough, Elison B. Blancaflor, Ivano Brunner, Johannes H. C. Cornelissen, Éric Garnier, Arthur Geßler, Sarah E. Hobbie, Ina C. Meier, Liesje Mommer, Catherine Picon‐Cochard, Laura Rose, Peter Ryser, Michael Scherer‐Lorenzen, Nadejda A. Soudzilovskaia, Alexia Stokes, Tao Sun, Oscar J. Valverde‐Barrantes, Monique Weemstra, Alexandra Weigelt, Nina Wurzburger, Larry M. York, Sarah A. Batterman, Moemy Gomes de Moraes, Štěpán Janeček, Hans Lambers, Verity Salmon, Nishanth Tharayil, Michael McCormack

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Phytologist · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant nutrient uptake and metabolism
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
FundersNarodowe Centrum NaukiGrantová Agentura České RepublikyNatural Environment Research CouncilSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungAgence Nationale de la RechercheSight Research UKVolkswagen FoundationDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftBritish Council
KeywordsRoot (linguistics)Context (archaeology)EcologyMetadataComputer scienceField (mathematics)Data scienceTraitBiologyWorld Wide WebMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the context of a recent massive increase in research on plant root functions and their impact on the environment, root ecologists currently face many important challenges to keep on generating cutting-edge, meaningful and integrated knowledge. Consideration of the below-ground components in plant and ecosystem studies has been consistently called for in recent decades, but methodology is disparate and sometimes inappropriate. This handbook, based on the collective effort of a large team of experts, will improve trait comparisons across studies and integration of information across databases by providing standardised methods and controlled vocabularies. It is meant to be used not only as starting point by students and scientists who desire working on below-ground ecosystems, but also by experts for consolidating and broadening their views on multiple aspects of root ecology. Beyond the classical compilation of measurement protocols, we have synthesised recommendations from the literature to provide key background knowledge useful for: (1) defining below-ground plant entities and giving keys for their meaningful dissection, classification and naming beyond the classical fine-root vs coarse-root approach; (2) considering the specificity of root research to produce sound laboratory and field data; (3) describing typical, but overlooked steps for studying roots (e.g. root handling, cleaning and storage); and (4) gathering metadata necessary for the interpretation of results and their reuse. Most importantly, all root traits have been introduced with some degree of ecological context that will be a foundation for understanding their ecological meaning, their typical use and uncertainties, and some methodological and conceptual perspectives for future research. Considering all of this, we urge readers not to solely extract protocol recommendations for trait measurements from this work, but to take a moment to read and reflect on the extensive information contained in this broader guide to root ecology, including sections I-VII and the many introductions to each section and root trait description. Finally, it is critical to understand that a major aim of this guide is to help break down barriers between the many subdisciplines of root ecology and ecophysiology, broaden researchers' views on the multiple aspects of root study and create favourable conditions for the inception of comprehensive experiments on the role of roots in plant and ecosystem functioning.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.083

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0090.007
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.008
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0030.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.041

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 head0.140
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations616
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew PhytologistSame topicPlant nutrient uptake and metabolismFrench-language works237,207