MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307263415 · doi:10.3390/plants11202792

Intraspecific Leaf Trait Variation across and within Five Common Wine Grape Varieties

2022· article· en· W4307263415 on OpenAlexafffund
Samantha C. Macklin, Rachel. O. Mariani, Emily N. Young, Rosalyn Kish, Kimberley A. Cathline, Gavin Robertson, Adam R. Martin

Bibliographic record

VenuePlants · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicHorticultural and Viticultural Research
Canadian institutionsNiagara CollegeThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of Toronto ScarboroughNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsBiologyIntraspecific competitionTraitSpecific leaf areaGrowing seasonAgronomyDomesticationIdeotypeLeaf sizeCropBotanyHorticultureEcologyPhotosynthesis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Variability in traits forming the Leaf Economics Spectrum (LES) among and within crop species plays a key role in governing agroecosystem processes. However, studies evaluating the extent, causes, and consequences of within-species variation in LES traits for some of the world’s most common crops remain limited. This study quantified variations in nine leaf traits measured across 90 vines of five common wine grape (Vitis vinifera L.) varieties at two growth stages (post-flowering and veraison). Grape traits in these varieties covary along an intraspecific LES, in patterns similar to those documented in wild plants. Across the five varieties evaluated here, high rates of photosynthesis (A) and leaf nitrogen (N) concentrations were coupled with low leaf mass per area (LMA), whereas the opposite suite of traits defined the “resource-conserving end” of this intraspecific LES in grape. Variety identity was the strongest predictor of leaf physiological (A) and morphological traits (i.e., leaf area and leaf mass), whereas leaf chemical traits and LMA were best explained by growth stage. All five varieties expressed greater resource-conserving trait syndromes (i.e., higher LMA, lower N, and lower Amass) later in the growing season. Traits related to leaf hydraulics, including instantaneous water-use efficiency (WUE), were unrelated to LES and other resource capture traits, and were better explained by spatial location. These results highlight the relative contributions of genetic, developmental, and phenotypic factors in structuring trait variation in the five wine grape varieties evaluated here, and point to a key role of domestication in governing trait relationships in the world’s crops.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score0.742

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.264
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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlantsSame topicHorticultural and Viticultural ResearchFrench-language works237,207