Differentiation in stem and leaf traits among sympatric lianas, scandent shrubs and trees in a subalpine cold temperate forest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The scandent shrub plant form is a variant of liana that has upright and self-supporting stems when young but later becomes a climber. We aimed to explore the associations of stem and leaf traits among sympatric lianas, scandent shrubs and trees, and the effects of growth form and leaf habit on variation in stem or leaf traits. We measured 16 functional traits related to stem xylem anatomy, leaf morphology and nutrient stoichiometry in eight liana, eight scandent shrub and 21 tree species co-occurring in a subalpine cold temperate forest at an elevation of 2600-3200 m in Southwest China. Overall, lianas, scandent shrubs and trees were ordered along a fast-slow continuum of stem and leaf functional traits, with some traits overlapping. We found a consistent pattern of lianas > scandent shrubs > trees for hydraulically weighted vessel diameter, maximum vessel diameter and theoretical hydraulic conductivity. Vessel density and sapwood density showed a pattern of lianas = scandent shrubs < trees, and lianas < scandent shrubs = trees, respectively. Lianas had significantly higher specific leaf area and lower carbon concentration than co-occurring trees, with scandent shrubs showing intermediate values that overlapped with lianas and trees. The differentiation among lianas, scandent shrubs and trees was mainly explained by variation in stem traits. Additionally, deciduous lianas were positioned at the fast end of the trait spectrum, and evergreen trees at the slow end of the spectrum. Our results showed for the first time clear differentiation in stem and leaf traits among sympatric liana, scandent shrub and tree species in a subalpine cold temperate forest. This work will contribute to understanding the mechanisms responsible for variation in ecological strategies of different growth forms of woody plants.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".