In situ field measurements of photosynthetic rates of tropical tree species: a test of the functional group hypothesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined photosynthetic characteristics of 21 tree species from a Panamanian forest differing in successional status. We hypothesized that functional guilds of species, grouped by successional status, would differ in photosynthetic performance and that pioneers would be more sensitive to seasonality and more variable in response to light than intermediate or shade tolerants. Steady-state leaf-level photosynthesis (A) was measured in situ on eight trees per species. Light response curves were generated by fitting a hyperbolic model to these data. Average light saturated photosynthetic rates (Amax) were then calculated for each species. Variability of light, photosynthesis, and leaf characteristics were quantified using coefficients of variation (CV). Significant differences were detected among species and functional groups for A, Amax, and leaf N concentration. Functional group explained 46% of the observed variation in A. Pioneers exhibited higher light-saturated photosynthetic rates than intermediates; both were higher than shade tolerants. Intermediates were the most seasonally plastic group and had the highest leaf N concentration. Shade tolerants were found in lower, more variable light environments than pioneers. A strong positive correlation between diameter growth rate and photosynthetic rate (r2= 0.55, p = 0.004) was observed across species. Our results tend to confirm the hypothesis that physiological traits can be used to differentiate among functional groups of plants. However, no evidence was found for higher plasticity of pioneer compared with shade-tolerant species.Key words: tropical trees, physiological plasticity, photosynthesis, nitrogen, growth, tropical succession.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".