MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3168410130 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu21-13156

Tree rings and genetic control of drought resilience

2021· article· en· W3168410130 on OpenAlexaffabout
Miriam Isaac‐Renton, David Montwé, Michael Stoehr, Jonathan Degner, Trisha Hook, Lise van der Merwe, Omnia Gamal El‐Dien, Lori D. Daniels, Alvin D. Yanchuk, Elizabeth M. Campbell

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsCanada's Michael Smith Genome Sciences CentreMinistry of ForestsNatural Resources CanadaUniversity of British ColumbiaCanadian Forest Service
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSympatric speciationBiologyTemperate climateDouglas firPsychological resilienceResilience (materials science)Climate changeDrought stressAgroforestryForestryGeographyEcologyAgronomyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Severe drought events are affecting forests around the world, even in temperate climates. A viable climate change adaptation strategy may involve planting forests with trees more resilient to drought. The majority of the 300 million seedlings planted annually in western Canada are genetically-selected trees derived from tree breeding programs. Since tree breeding populations supply the seed that is deployed on the landscape, it is important to closely examine the degree of genetic control of drought resilience in these populations – yet methods for evaluating drought responses in mature experimental trials are limited. We evaluated the potential to use tree rings to infer genetic adaptation to drought. Specifically, we used annual growth increments to evaluate the genetic component behind variation in drought resilience. We also quantified potential genetic trade-offs between drought resilience and growth in long-term progeny trials. We worked with two economically and ecologically valuable sympatric conifers, coastal Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii var. menziesii) and western redcedar (Thuja plicata). Annual growth increment and tree height data were obtained from 1980 coastal Douglas-fir trees (93 polycross families on two well-replicated sites at age 19) and 1520 western redcedar trees (26 polycross families on three well-replicated sites at age 18). All trees showed substantial reduction in growth under drought, but there was clear variability in the longer-term response of families within each breeding population. The heritability (h2) of such drought resilience, or proportion of this variation explained by genetics, was high for Douglas-fir (h2 = 0.26, SE = 0.07) and moderate for redcedar (h2 = 0.13, SE = 0.04). Preliminary genetic correlations between tree height and drought resilience were also positive for both species (Douglas-fir: rg = 0.77, SE = 0.18; redcedar: rg = 0.62, SE = 0.17). Families that were both high-yielding and drought resilient could also be identified. Since growth response to drought is a variable and heritable trait, these traits are therefore under the control of the tree breeder. Moreover, the positive genetic correlations between tree height and an adaptive growth response to drought suggest that historic selection for tree height did not compromise drought resilience of planted seedlings. Tree rings appear to be an effective tool to screen these populations for drought resilience, which will help ensure that planted trees will remain healthy and productive under climate change.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.181
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicForest ecology and management→French-language works237,207→