MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1963734438 · doi:10.5558/tfc2011-030

Timing and duration of herbaceous vegetation control in northern conifer plantations: 15th-year tree growth and soil nutrient effects

2011· article· en· W1963734438 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Michael K. Hoepting, Robert G. Wagner, James W. McLaughlin, Doug Pitt

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaOntario Forest Research InstituteCanadian Forest Service
FundersCanadian Forest ServiceU.S. Forest ServiceUniversity of Pittsburgh
KeywordsVegetation (pathology)Herbaceous plantSowingEnvironmental scienceBlack spruceNutrientStand developmentWoody plantAgronomyThinningSilvicultureForestryBiologyEcologyAgroforestryTaigaGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 15-year re-measurement of a study designed to identify the optimum timing and duration of herbaceous vegetation control in plantations of four commercial conifer species was completed in northern Ontario. Few differences were revealed in conifer growth when contrasting early and delayed timing of vegetation control. Conversely, each conifer species responded positively to increased duration of vegetation control, with stand volume gains of up to 209% achieved with four to five years of vegetation control following planting. Compared to earlier assessments, the timing of vegetation control appeared less important than duration. Diminishing returns in the fastest-growing species (jack pine [Pinus banksiana Lamb.] and red pine [Pinus resinosa Ait.]) are consistent with intraspecific competition related to the onset of crown closure in these stands. Quantification of a suite of soil nutrient pools along the gradient of increased duration of vegetation control indicated that the more intensive levels of vegetation control did not adversely affect the assessed soil nutrient pools in red pine or jack pine, but a cautionary approach should be considered for white pine (Pinus strobus L.) and black spruce (Picea mariana [Mill.] BSP), where some declines were evident. Vegetation control for two to three years following planting should maximize early conifer growth potential without adverse longer-term effects on soil nutrient pools.

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 score0.113
Threshold uncertainty score0.225

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations15
Published2011
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicForest ecology and managementFrench-language works237,207