MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1833295133 · doi:10.1139/x11-118

Comparison of growth–climate relationships between northern red oak and white oak across eastern North America

2011· article· en· W1833295133 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
David C. LeBlanc, Mark Terrell

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicTree-ring climate responses
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of WinnipegIndiana State UniversityNorthwestern University
KeywordsPhenologyEcologyFagaceaeDendrochronologyRange (aeronautics)GeographyHabitatPrecipitationClimate changeGrowing seasonBiologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to evaluate growth–climate associations for northern red oak ( Quercus rubra L.) across much of its geographic range in eastern North America and to compare these associations with those of white oak ( Quercus alba L.). Tree-ring and climate data were obtained for a total of 82 sites, including 51 sites where both oak species were sampled. Northern red oak radial growth was most strongly and spatially consistently correlated with site water balance variables for the early growing season (May through July). Correlations with prior year autumn and winter precipitation were also identified at a smaller number of sites. The phenology of growth–climate correlations was virtually identical between northern red oak and white oak, although there was modest evidence that correlations were stronger for white oak. These results support the hypothesis that species with similar wood anatomy, geographic distribution, and habitat preferences may have similar growth–climate relationships. This suggests that functional groups of tree species may be defined a priori based on existing knowledge of their wood anatomy and ecology.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.800
Threshold uncertainty score0.956

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.161
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations33
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicTree-ring climate responsesFrench-language works237,207