MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1552558847 · doi:10.1093/wjaf/15.4.177

Regeneration of White Spruce Under Aspen Canopies: Seeding, Planting, and Site Preparation

2000· article· en· W1552558847 on OpenAlex
James D. Stewart, Simon M. Landhäusser, Kenneth J. Stadt, Victor J. Lieffers

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueWestern Journal of Applied Forestry · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaCanadian Forest Service
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScarificationSeedlingNatural regenerationSowingGerminationSeedingUnderstoryForest regenerationBiologyAgronomyGrazingPicea abiesHorticultureBotanyAgroforestryDormancyCanopy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study investigated the establishment and survival of naturally and artificially seeded white spruce (Picea glauca), as well as three sizes of planted white spruce stock, on different types of scarification beneath mature aspen (Populus tremuloides) in northern Alberta. White spruce seed rain, natural and hand-seeded regeneration establishment and survival, and understory vegetation response were monitored for 4 yr on scarified strips (light blading, heavy blading, and ridged) and on undisturbed controls. Despite a heavy seed rain in 1993, seedling establishment on control plots was almost nil. On scarified plots, the number of seeds required to produce a live seedling after 3 growing seasons ranged from 15 to 37 and up to 68 in one site. Most mortality occurred during the summer. Germination rate on the hand-seeded plots ranged from 19 to 28% on the scarified strips. There was no significant difference in survival from seed (15%) after three growing seasons among the three scarification treatments. Survival of planted stock was 98% on scarified strips and 96% on control strips. Diameter growth was least on control plots but was not significantly different among the scarified treatments. In contrast, height increment was greatest on the light blading treatment and differed little among the other two treatments and control. These results suggest that spruce regeneration in aspen forests can be promoted by scarification or underplanting. West. J. Appl. For. 15(4):177–182.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.136
Threshold uncertainty score0.427

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.211
Teacher spread0.205 · 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