MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4414113825 · doi:10.1139/cjb-2025-0064

Shade does not decrease nitrogen fixation in the boreal shrub <i>Shepherdia canadensis</i>

2025· article· en· W4414113825 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Jason Tydings, John Markham

Bibliographic record

VenueBotany · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsNitrogen fixationShrubActinorhizal plantSubarctic climateCanopyLarchNitrogenAbiotic component

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High-latitude environments are characterized by harsh abiotic conditions that limit nitrogen availability to plants. However, even though these environments are nitrogen-limited, nitrogen-fixing plants are less prevalent at higher latitudes. Reduced light availability, soil temperatures, and water availability are all thought to limit nitrogen fixation due to its energetic costs, restricting nitrogen fixation plants to early successional communities at high latitudes. Shepherdia canadensis (buffalo berry) is an actinorhizal shrub found in higher latitudes across Canada, but little is known about its nitrogen fixation ecology. We determined how much nitrogen fixation occurs in buffalo berry and how nitrogen fixation varies with canopy cover at the northern edge of the boreal forest. Using the natural abundance of stable nitrogen isotopes, we found that S. candensis shrubs get 73 ± 8% of their nitrogen through fixation and that fixation is 10% higher in the forest compared to the tundra. Shrubs receiving more solar radiation produced thicker leaves with higher δ 13 C values, suggesting stomatal closure in response to reduced water availability. The change in leaf morphology makes leaves more efficient, allowing plants to maintain N fixation under increasing shade. However, N fixation in subarctic habitats is limited by water stress.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBotany→Same topicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology→French-language works237,207→