MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3109768465 · doi:10.1111/1365-2435.13723

Patterns in intraspecific variation in root traits are species‐specific along an elevation gradient

2020· article· en· W3109768465 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueFunctional Ecology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgence Nationale de la RechercheConsejo Nacional de Ciencia y TecnologíaMcGill University
KeywordsIntraspecific competitionBiologyInterspecific competitionTraitEcologyEnvironmental gradientBeta diversityBiodiversityHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Intraspecific trait variation is an important driver of plant performance in different environments. Although roots acquire essential resources that vary with the environment, most studies have focused on intraspecific variation in leaf traits, and research on roots is often restricted to a few species. It remains largely unclear how and to what extent root traits vary with the environment and whether general intraspecific patterns exist across species. We compared intraspecific variation in specific root length (SRL), root diameter, root tissue density (RTD) and root branching density of 11 species along a 1,000 m elevation gradient in the French Alps. We tested (a) the extent of intraspecific versus interspecific root trait variation along the gradient, (b) whether intraspecific trait patterns with elevation were consistent among species and (c) whether environmental variables better explained intraspecific variation in root traits than elevation. Specifically, we hypothesised that within a species, root trait values would adjust to enhance resource acquisition (either through an increase in SRL or root diameter, and/or in branching density) and/or conservation (increased RTD) at higher elevations. Species identity explained most of the overall variation in root traits. Elevation explained only a minor proportion of intraspecific root trait variation, which was larger within than between elevations. Also, trait relationships with elevation rarely agreed with our hypotheses, varied strongly across species and were often differently related to environmental variation. Generally, climate, soil and vegetation properties better explained intraspecific root variation than elevation, but these relationships were highly species‐dependent. Along complex environmental gradients where multiple properties simultaneously change, roots of different species vary in different ways, leading to species‐specific patterns in intraspecific root trait variation. The lack of support for our hypotheses may be caused by the multiple interactions between environmental properties, small‐scale soil heterogeneity, species phylogeny and changing plant–plant interactions. Our findings suggest that, to enhance our understanding of the effects of environmental change on plant performance, we need to better integrate the multiple dimensions of plant responses to change and measure a broader set of root traits and environmental variables. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.162 · 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