MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4236667698 · doi:10.1139/x01-094

Seasonal root growth of Scots pine seedlings in relation to shoot phenology, carbohydrate status, and nutrient supply

2001· article· en· W4236667698 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sari Iivonen, Risto Rikala, E. Vapaavuori

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant nutrient uptake and metabolism
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMaj ja Tor Nesslingin Säätiö
KeywordsScots pineShootNutrientBiologyPhenologyGrowing seasonBotanyBiomass (ecology)SeedlingEcophysiologyBiomass partitioningHorticultureAgronomyPinus <genus>PhotosynthesisEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To ascertain whether the growth rhythm of roots differs from that of the shoot, the seasonal pattern of dry mass allocation was determined in 1-year-old Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) seedlings. Gas exchange, chlorophyll fluorescence, and the dynamics of starch and soluble sugars were examined to understand the role of stored carbon and that of current photosynthates in meeting the sink demand of plant organs. In this growth-chamber experiment, hydroponic cultures supplied the seedlings with low (0.25 mM N) or high (2.5 mM N) nutrient level. The climatic conditions in the chamber simulated the weather conditions from May to mid-October in southern Finland. Root growth was most intense at the end of the growing season, at which time shoot growth slowed down. Nutrient level did not affect the growth rhythm of the roots, but the total production of root biomass was favoured by high level of nutrients. The response of root growth to root zone temperature (RZT) was not the same over the growing season, indicating that the sensitivity of root growth to RZT depends on the growth phase of the seedling. The growth rhythm of the roots is probably regulated by several internal and external factors and their interactions, including RZT and availability of photosynthates.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations46
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicPlant nutrient uptake and metabolismFrench-language works237,207