MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1750851246 · doi:10.1139/x11-006

Predicting site index from climatic, edaphic, and stand structural properties for seven plantation-grown conifer species in Quebec

2011· article· en· W1750851246 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Jean Beaulieu, Frédéric Raulier, Guy Prégent, Jean Bousquet

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsMinistère des Ressources naturelles et des Forêts (Québec)Centre de Géomatique du QuébecNatural Resources Canada
FundersCanadian Forest Service
KeywordsSite indexEdaphicEnvironmental scienceDeserts and xeric shrublandsEcologyLeaf area indexForestryAridity indexAridPhysical geographyAtmospheric sciencesGeographyHydrology (agriculture)Soil scienceBiologySoil waterGeologyHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Models were built to relate site index to biophysical variables and stand structure for seven conifer species grown in plantation. Reduced models without stand structure were also derived to allow the prediction of site index even when information on the stand is unavailable. Biophysical variables tested were degree-days, aridity, summer precipitation, vapour pressure deficit, and soil water-holding capacity. The stand structure was accounted for using a Shannon evenness index of diameter at breast height distribution. Both full and reduced models had low to moderate R2 values and were slightly biased for most of the species. The results indicate that while correlations between phytometric and biophysical site indices are rather weak, those between plantation yield predicted using both indices and volume observed in the field are reasonably high (above 0.80). The biophysical site index models derived in this study could be used for strategic planning to estimate plantation yield or allowable cut for each of the seven conifer species.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.136

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2011
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicForest ecology and managementFrench-language works237,207