Response of Boreal Jack Pine (Pinus banksiana Lamb.) Stands to a Gradient of Commercial Thinning Intensities, with and without N Fertilization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines tree and stand response to a gradient of commercial thinning intensities and nitrogen fertilization (200 kg N ha−1) in nine jack pine (Pinus banksiana) stands of Eastern Canada over a period of 14 years. Thinning intensity ranged from 0% basal area removal in control plots to 64% in thinned plots. Tree diameter increment, absolute and relative volume increment and mean volume increased with thinning intensity and were higher in fertilized plots. Individual tree response depended on tree diameter, with smallest trees exhibiting highest relative volume increment to thinning intensity. Stand basal area increment was positively associated to initial stand basal area and negatively to stand age. In thinned and fertilized plots, stand volume increment was higher and natural mortality lower than in fertilized only and unfertilized control plots over the 5–14 year period after thinning. However, the positive effect of fertilization on tree volume increment decreased with thinning intensity. Despite positive individual tree growth responses to thinning and fertilization, residual stand volume increment decreased with increased thinning intensity in both fertilized and unfertilized plots. While total cumulative stand volume (harvested + residual) also decreased with thinning intensity in unfertilized plots, comparable total volumes were observed in fertilized + thinned and unthinned control plots. Nitrogen fertilization in the years following commercial thinning enhanced the benefit of thinning on these relatively poor sites by increasing tree diameter growth, lowering mortality, and increasing total stand merchantable volume compared to unfertilized thinned stands.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".