Response of leaf stoichiometry of Potentilla anserina to elevation in China's Qilian Mountains
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plants adapt to changes in elevation by regulating their leaf ecological stoichiometry. Potentilla anserina L. that grows rapidly under poor or even bare soil conditions has become an important ground cover plant for ecological restoration. However, its leaf ecological stoichiometry has been given little attention, resulting in an insufficient understanding of its environmental adaptability and growth strategies. The objective of this study was to compare the leaf stoichiometry of P. anserina at different elevations (2,400, 2,600, 2,800, 3,000, 3,200, 3,500, and 3,800 m) in the middle eastern part of Qilian Mountains. With an increase in elevation, leaf carbon concentration [(C) leaf ] significantly decreased, with the maximum value of 446.04 g·kg −1 (2,400 m) and the minimum value of 396.78 g·kg −1 (3,500 m). Leaf nitrogen concentration [(N) leaf ] also increased with an increase in elevation, and its maximum and minimum values were 37.57 g·kg −1 (3,500 m) and 23.71 g·kg −1 (2,800 m), respectively. Leaf phosphorus concentration [(P) leaf ] was the highest (2.79 g·kg −1 ) at 2,400 m and the lowest (0.91 g·kg −1 ) at 2,800 m. The [C] leaf /[N] leaf decreased with an increase in elevation, while [N] leaf /[P] leaf showed an opposite trend. The mean annual temperature, mean annual precipitation, soil pH, organic carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus at different elevations mainly affected [C] leaf , [N] leaf , and [P] leaf . The growth of P. anserina in the study area was mainly limited by P, and this limitation was stronger with increased elevation. Progressively reducing P loss at high elevation is of great significance to the survival of P. anserina in this specific region.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".