MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213248338 · doi:10.1093/biosci/biab135

The Drought Response of Eastern US Oaks in the Context of Their Declining Abundance

2021· article· en· W4213248338 on OpenAlexaff
Kimberly A. Novick, Insu Jo, Loïc D’Orangeville, Michael Benson, Tsun Fung Au, Mallory L. Barnes, Sander O. Denham, Songlin Fei, Kelly A. Heilman, Taehee Hwang, Tara L. Keyser, Justin T. Maxwell, Chelcy Ford Miniat, J. S. McLachlan, Neil Pederson, Lixin Wang, Jeffrey D. Wood, Richard P. Phillips

Bibliographic record

VenueBioScience · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersDivision of Environmental BiologyIndiana UniversityU.S. Department of AgricultureNational Science Foundation
KeywordsDominance (genetics)Abundance (ecology)Context (archaeology)EcologyGeographyClimate changeBiologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The oak (Quercus) species of eastern North America are declining in abundance, threatening the many socioecological benefits they provide. We discuss the mechanisms responsible for their loss, many of which are rooted in the prevailing view that oaks are drought tolerant. We then synthesize previously published data to comprehensively review the drought response strategies of eastern US oaks, concluding that whether or not eastern oaks are drought tolerant depends firmly on the metric of success. Although the anisohydric strategy of oaks sometimes confers a gas exchange and growth advantage, it exposes oaks to damaging hydraulic failure, such that oaks are just as or more likely to perish during drought than neighboring species. Consequently, drought frequency is not a strong predictor of historic patterns of oak abundance, although long-term climate and fire frequency are strongly correlated with declines in oak dominance. The oaks’ ability to survive drought may become increasingly difficult in a drier future.

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)0.000
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations43
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioScienceSame topicPlant Water Relations and Carbon DynamicsFrench-language works237,207