MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2766053591

Evaluating the Influence of Stem Form and Vigor on Product Potential, Growth, and Survival for Northern Commercial Hardwood Species

2017· article· en· W2766053591 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mark Castle

Notice bibliographique

RevueDigitalCommons (California Polytechnic State University) · 2017
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEngineering
ThématiqueForest Biomass Utilization and Management
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésHardwoodProduct (mathematics)Environmental scienceBiologyMathematicsBotany
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Northern hardwood and mixed-wood forest types occupy a considerable percentage of the forest landscape across the Northeastern United States and portions of eastern Canada. While capable of producing valuable saw timber and veneer products, hardwood species demonstrate a wide range of stem quality resulting from the large variety of stem forms and defects that these species can manifest. The effect of different stem forms and damage has largely not been accounted for in predictions of volume, growth, and mortality. In addition to potential bias in growth and yield applications, the lack of quantification of these features has left the efficacy of silvicultural tools such as tree classification guides untested. Using a tree classification system developed by the Northern Hardwood Research Institute (NHRI), form and risk classifications were assigned to several commercial hardwood species across sites in Maine, New Hampshire, and New Brunswick. Regression analyses were used to accomplish the following objectives; 1) quantify sawlog recovery as a function of a trees size, form, and risk; 2) determine the occurrence of stem form and risk among species; 3) and evaluate the influence of stem form and risk on individual tree diameter growth and survival. For the first chapter, a linear mixed effects model was used to quantify the proportion of sawlog material in individual trees. Results indicated three form classifications and a binary classification of risk were sufficient to account for variation in sawlog recovery. The average proportion of sawlog was largest for trees with single straight stems and smallest for those displaying a large significant fork on the first 5 m of their stem. Stem damage also had substantial implications on product recovery where trees considered to be high-risk had overall lower proportions of sawlog volume. Using the simplified form and risk classes, a series of logistic regression models were developed to predict the occurrence of risk and form across hardwood species. Among the species in the analysis, yellow birch and red maple had the highest probability of being high-risk. Sugar maple had the highest probability of demonstrating good form while red maple and red oak were the most likely to have poor form. In the second chapter continuous forest inventory data from five locations in Maine and New Hampshire were used to evaluate the influence of form and risk on tree growth and survival for hardwood species. The influence of form and risk on growth were analyzed by assessing bias in the regional diameter increment equation used in the Acadian Variant of the Forest Vegetation Simulator FVS-ACD and through development of a periodic annual increment model (PAI). The regional FVS-ACD equation tended to over predict for species and risk class while binary form and risk classifications were significant variables in the PAI model, although their effect was relatively small. A nonlinear model was used to quantify annualized individual tree survival. Trees with single straight stems had statistically higher survival probabilities compared to all other stem forms, however the magnitude of the difference in survival was not substantial.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,588
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,540

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,030
Tête enseignante GPT0,239
Écart entre enseignants0,209 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2017
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueDigitalCommons (California Polytechnic State University)Même sujetForest Biomass Utilization and ManagementTravaux en français237 207