Effect of tree species and seed origin on climate change trial outcomes in Southern Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Under a changing climate, species will need to rapidly adapt to novel conditions at existing locations, migrate to track suitable climate, or risk widespread declines. For sessile, slow-migrating organisms like trees, adaptive capacity is expected to be particularly important for survival. Alternatively, assisted migration has been proposed as a means to help align tree populations with shifting climate habitats. Here we report on the performance of seed sources and species at broadleaf and conifer climate change trials at 10 and 11 years after planting, respectively. The trials were established in southern Ontario – an important transition zone between boreal and temperate ecosystems – and were designed to assess: (1) the assisted migration potential of six broadleaf species (via northward movements of seed sources), and (2) the adaptive capacity of three conifer species (via southward movements of seed sources). Both broadleaf and coniferous seed sources tolerated significant movements while maintaining reasonable growth and survival rates. In fact, several coniferous seed sources exhibited relatively high growth and survival rates despite southward transfers of more than 1000 km (> 5 °C mean annual temperature) – indicating considerable adaptive capacity to climate change in these northern conifer populations. Furthermore, several of the broadleaf species exhibited high levels of growth and survival despite being planted at, or beyond, their current northern range limits – suggesting the potential for modest range expansions via assisted migration. Despite caveats related to the relatively young age of the plantations and deer browsing at the site, these findings help forest managers better understand potential climate change impacts and assisted migration outcomes.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 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".