MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1949897725 · doi:10.1029/2009gl041849

Frost‐ring chronologies as dendroclimatic proxies of boreal environments

2010· article· en· W1949897725 on OpenAlexafffund
Serge Payette, Ann Delwaide, M. Simard

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicTree-ring climate responses
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFrost (temperature)BorealTaigaClimate changeGrowing seasonDendrochronologyWoodlandClimatologyEnvironmental scienceChronologyPhysical geographyBlack spruceGeologyGeographyEcologyForestryBiologyMeteorologyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Frost rings are formed in tree stems when growing‐season frosts affect immature wood cells, producing collapsed cells within annual tree rings. Open boreal forests are most susceptible to record growing‐season frost because they lack the greenhouse effect commonly observed in closed forests. Here we present a novel method to construct regional frost‐ring chronologies in lichen‐black spruce woodlands of the boreal forest zone. Because the ability of trees to form frost rings depends on several factors (including bark thickness and ring width), we used two models to produce a Frost Composite Index based on a frost susceptibility window of cambial age <30 years. The frost‐ring chronology showed alternating periods of high and low frost activity that were highly consistent within and among sites. Reconstruction of growing‐season frost activity may be used as dendroclimatic proxies of climate variability and may give insights into future risks of frost damage in a warming climate.

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)0.001
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations46
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicTree-ring climate responsesFrench-language works237,207