MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Leaf and Flower Phenology of Woody Plant Species at Harvard Forest and Southern Quebec 2015

2019· dataset· en· W6920809935 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Data Initiative · 2019
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhenologyphotoperiodismEcosystemClimate changeWoody plantCuttingForcing (mathematics)Spring (device)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate predictions of spring plant phenology with climate change are critical for projections of growing seasons, plant communities and a number of ecosystem services, including carbon storage. Progress towards prediction, however, has been slow because the major cues known to drive phenology – temperature (including winter chilling and spring forcing) and photoperiod – generally covary in nature and may interact, making accurate predictions of plant responses to climate change complex and nonlinear. Alternatively, recent work suggests many species may be dominated by one cue, which would make predictions much simpler. Here, we manipulated all three cues across 28 woody species from two North American forests. Study sites were Harvard Forest and St. Hipplolyte, Quebec. Species were selected for this study based on their prevalence at the study sites; 28 species are included in this study. At each site, multiple cuttings of six or more representative individuals were collected. In total, we tracked the phenology of 2,137 cuttings from 275 individual source plants. All species responded to all cues examined. Chilling exerted a strong effect, especially on budburst (-15.8 d), with responses to forcing and photoperiod greatest for leafout (-19.1 and -11.2 d, respectively). Interactions between chilling and forcing suggest that each cue may compensate somewhat for the other. Cues varied across species, leading to staggered leafout within each community and supporting the idea that phenology is a critical aspect of species’ temporal niches. Our results suggest that predicting the spring phenology of communities will be difficult, as all species we studied could have complex, nonlinear responses to future warming.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.016

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Data InitiativeFrench-language works237,207