MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4237886785 · doi:10.24124/2001/bpgub213

The effect of paper birch (Betula papyrifera marsh.) root reinforcement on terrain stability in British Columbia

2001· dissertation· en· W4237886785 sur OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Kirstin Anne Campbell

Notice bibliographique

Revuenon disponible
Typedissertation
Langueen
DomaineEngineering
ThématiqueTree Root and Stability Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Mots-clésBetula pendulaBetula pubescensEnvironmental scienceBetulaceaeReinforcementSoil waterAgronomyGeographyBotanyBiologySoil scienceMaterials scienceComposite material

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Management of paper birch in mixedwood stands is a sustainable forest management practice. In addition to the ecological and economical benefits of mixedwoods, paper birch trees can maintain or enhance slope stability. This thesis attempted to quantify the contribution of birch root reinforcement in BC to slope shear resistance. The objectives of this thesis were to determine the: 1) genetic variation in paper birch root reinforcement, 2) environmental variation in root reinforcement between birch and pine, and 3) differences in root reinforcement between birch and pine. The first study compared the contribution of birch and pine roots (from different populations growing in three soil types) to soil shear resistance using two controlled environment shear tests (Sonotube and Polytube Experiments). The second study (Tree Uprooting Experiment) compared the vertical uprooting resistance of birch and pine growing in different soil types at three field study sites. The third study (Genecology Experiment) determined the variation of four birch populations growing at one location. Results from the tube experiments found that the roots of birch and pine trees contributed to a significant increase in shear strength, regardless of soil type. At a depth of 20-44 cm, paper birch increased shear strength by as much 88%, while pine increased strength by as much as 61%. There was little variation in root reinforcement among the six birch populations in the Sonotube Experiment, which suggested that these trees were from one generalist population rather than six specialist populations. Soil texture affected the root reinforcement of birch and pine in the Polytube Experiment~ both species had the highest root reinforcement in coarse textured sand and the least root reinforcement in medium textured silt. The limiting factor in root reinforcement, in this case, was attributed to a lack of water and nutrients in the silt soil. In the Tree Uprooting Experiment, birch trees had 50% greater resistance to uprooting than did pine trees. Small diameter birch and pine at Aleza Lake had greater uprooting resistance than birch and pine at other field sites. However, larger diameter trees at Gregg Creek and Red Rock had greater uprooting resistance than similar size trees at Aleza Lake. Soil strength and moisture content may have accounted for the uprooting resistance differences among diameter classes at Aleza Lake. Results from the Genecology Experiment showed that the Skeena population had the greatest uprooting resistance, and the greatest height, diameter, and root biomass compared to the other three populations. The results from companion trials, and from the uprooting tests suggested that Skeena trees represent a generalist population. In the same experiment, the nursery where the trees were grown impacted uprooting resistance, even after five years growing in the field. The results from this study reconfirmed the significant length of time nursery can affect field performance. Significant findings arising from this thesis were that: 1) birch saplings have greater root strength than pine across all soil types, 2) root system structure has an important role in root reinforcement between tree species, 3) root reinforcement is maximized by birch and pine when growing in freely drained, cohesionless sandy soil, and 4) further study of birch genecology is needed to identify generalist, high performing populations such as Skeena. Overall, managing for mixedwoods in BC has both ecological and economical benefits, including enhanced slope stability.

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)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,957
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
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)0,0010,000

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 Opus0,005
Tête enseignante GPT0,217
Écart entre enseignants0,212 · 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.

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

Citations1
Publié2001
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même sujetTree Root and Stability StudiesTravaux en français237 207