Effect of soil warming on growth and physiology of aspen seedlings from Alberta, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Boreal tree species are migrating northwards due to rising temperatures, and differences in heat tolerance can impact the range limits of boreal species. Soil warming may benefit tree growth by promoting root development, or harm growth by creating a high-stress environment, increasing root respiration rates. We assessed the impact of soil warming on the growth of 2-year-old trembling aspen seedlings from 10 families. These families originated from Peace River, in central Alberta, and Camrose, near the southern boreal fringe in Alberta, Canada. We correlated growth traits with climatic data from each region and analyzed the effect of soil warming on the gas exchange of seedlings from Camrose. Families from Peace River exhibited greater growth overall, regardless of warming treatment, while families from Camrose showed a positive growth response under soil warming. Camrose families exposed to soil warming showed greater total leaf area and total leaf biomass compared to those without warming. A Principal Component Analysis (PCA) showed that, regardless of region, some families displayed stronger positive responses and appeared better adapted to soil warming than others. The overall positive response of the Camrose families to soil warming suggests that they have the capacity to take advantage of warmer environmental conditions. Our results indicate regional growth differences in aspen families in Alberta and variation in performance between families within a region, indicating there is differential capacity within local populations to acclimate under rapid climate change.
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 | 0.001 | 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 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".