Bulb growth potential is independent of leaf longevity for the spring ephemeral <i>Erythronium americanum</i> Ker-Gawl.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Growth in most spring ephemerals is decreased under warmer temperatures. Although photosynthetic activities are improved at warmer temperatures, leaves senesce earlier, which prevents the bulb from reaching a larger size. A longer leaf life duration during a warm spring, therefore, may improve bulb mass. We tested this hypothesis by modulating leaf life span of Erythronium americanum through the application of Promalin® (PRO; cytokinins and gibberellins) that prolonged or silver thiosulfate (STS) that reduced leaf duration. Gas exchange and chlorophyll fluorescence were measured along with leaf and bulb carbohydrate concentrations. Plants were also pulse labelled with 13CO2 to monitor sugar transport to the bulb. Lower photosynthetic rates and shorter leaf life span of STS plants reduced the amount of carbon that they assimilated during the season, resulting in a smaller bulb compared with control plants. PRO plants maintained their photosynthetic rates for a longer period than control plants, yet final bulb biomass did not differ between them. We conclude that seasonal growth for E. americanum is not limited by leaf life duration under warm growing conditions, but rather by limited sink growth capacity. Under global warming, spring geophytes might be at risk of being reduced in size and, eventually, reproducing less frequently.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".