MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1858951962 · doi:10.1139/cjb-2015-0078

Aboveground biomass and leaf area equations for three common tree species of Hyrcanian temperate forests in northern Iran

2015· article· en· W1858951962 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Unes Shahrokhzadeh, Hormoz Sohrabi, Carolyn A. Copenheaver

Bibliographic record

VenueBotany · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTree allometryBiomass (ecology)BeechFagus orientalisAllometryDiameter at breast heightAkaike information criterionTemperate climateMathematicsTemperate rainforestEcologyBiologyForestryEnvironmental scienceBotanyStatisticsEcosystemGeographyBiomass partitioning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Biomass equations are essential for evaluating the climate change mitigation potential of forests through biomass accumulation and carbon sequestration. In northern Iran’s Hyrcanian forests, topographic relief is so extreme that developing biomass equations from destructive sampling of trees is physically challenging. In this paper, allometric biomass and leaf area equations were developed for three common Hyrcanian tree species: Oriental beech (Fagus orientalis Lipsky), chestnut-leaved oak (Quercus castaneifolia C.A.Mey.), and common hornbeam (Carpinus betulus L.). A total of 30 trees, ranging in diameter at breast height (DBH) from 21 to 90 cm, were felled and stems, branches, twigs, and leaves from each tree were measured and weighed. Allometric equations for estimating biomass from DBH and height and their combinations were derived. Model comparison and selection were based on R2, Akaike’s information criterion (AIC), prediction error sums of squares, model standard error estimate (SEE), ΔAIC, and correction factor. The best-fit equations had adjusted R2 values between 0.81 to 0.98 and SEE values between 0.351 and 0.681. The allometric equations provide improved methods for predicting forest biomass and carbon storage in Hyrcanian forests from standard forestry measurements, which means these equations may be applied to historical and new forest data.

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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations9
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBotanySame topicForest ecology and managementFrench-language works237,207