Latitudinal clines in bud flush phenology reflect genetic variation in chilling requirements in balsam poplar, <i>Populus balsamifera</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PREMISE: Boreal and northern temperate forest trees possess finely tuned mechanisms of dormancy, which match bud phenology with local seasonality. After winter dormancy, the accumulation of chilling degree days (CDD) required for rest completion before the accumulation of growing degree days (GDD) during quiescence is an important step in the transition to spring bud flush. While bud flush timing is known to be genetically variable within species, few studies have investigated variation among genotypes from different climates in response to variable chilling duration. METHODS: We performed a controlled environment study using dormant cuttings from 10 genotypes of Populus balsamifera, representing a broad latitudinal gradient (43-58°N). We exposed cuttings to varying amounts of chilling (0-10 weeks) and monitored subsequent GDD to bud flush at a constant forcing temperature. RESULTS: Chilling duration strongly accelerated bud flush timing, with increasing CDD resulting in fewer GDD to flush. Genotypic variation for bud flush was significant and stratified by latitude, with southern genotypes requiring more GDD to flush than northern genotypes. The latitudinal cline was pronounced under minimal chilling, whereas genotypic variation in GDD to bud flush converged as CDD increased. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate that increased chilling lessens GDD to bud flush in a genotype-specific manner. Our results emphasize that latitudinal clines in bud flush reflect a critical genotype-by-environment interaction, whereby differences in bud flush between southern vs. northern genotypes depend on chilling. Our results suggest selection has shaped chilling requirements and depth of rest as an adaptive strategy to avoid precocious flush in climates with midwinter warming.
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".