Wood and lumber properties from unthinned and precommercially thinned black spruce plantations.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined wood and lumber bending properties of 44-yr-old plantation black spruce subjected to precommercial thinning (PCT) at age 23.PCT and tree diameter at breast height (DBH) had little effect on heartwood content and the No. 2 & Better lumber grade yield.With increasing DBH of 10 -18 cm, basic wood density (Db), lumber bending modulus of elasticity (MOE), and modulus of rupture (MOR) decreased by 8.1, 15.8 and 19.0%, respectively.The Db, MOE, MOR, and machine stress-rated (MSR) lumber yield from the stand with 35% basal area removal (T35) were lower than those of the control (T0) and the stand with 20% basal area removal (T20).The T20 had no significant effect on the Db, MOE, MOR, and MSR lumber yield.Juvenile wood content had a negative effect on lumber bending properties.The percentage of lumber pieces complying with the design values decreased with increasing thinning intensity.On average, MOE from T0, T20, and T35 were 10.9, 12.1, and 19.5% lower, respectively, than that from mature natural black spruce stands and 19.6, 18.0, and 10.8% higher, respectively, than that from wider-spaced black spruce plantations.MOE from T0 was also 14.5% higher than that from 50 -60-yr-old natural jack pine stands.This study indicates that it is possible to produce high-quality lumber from dense black spruce plantations with appropriate thinning.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".