Replication Data for: Differences in Leaf Temperature between Lianas and Trees in the Neotropical Canopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: Leaf temperature (Tleaf) influences photosynthesis and respiration. Currently, there is a growing interest in including lianas in productivity models due to their increasing abundance and their detrimental effects in the carbon stock of tropical ecosystems. Therefore, understanding the differences of Tleaf between lianas and trees is important for future predictions of productivity. Here, we determined the displayed leaf temperature (Td = Tleaf − air temperature) of several species of lianas and their host trees during El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) and non-ENSO years to evaluate if the presence of lianas affects the Td of their host trees, and if leaves of lianas and their host trees exhibit differences in Td. Our results suggest that close to midday, the presence of lianas does not affect the Td of their host trees; however, lianas tend to have higher values of Td than their hosts across seasons, in both ENSO and non-ENSO years. Although lianas and trees tend to have similar physiological-temperature responses, differences in Td could lead to significant differences in rates of photosynthesis and respiration based on temperature response curves. Future models should thus consider differences in leaf temperature between these two life forms to achieve robust predictions of productivity
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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.071 | 0.059 |
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".