MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1963784197 · doi:10.1139/x01-150

Clonal variation in basal area growth patterns during stand development in hybrid poplar

2001· article· en· W1963784197 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Brian J. Stanton

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBioenergy crop production and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopulus trichocarpaSalicaceaeBiologyMathematicsRotation (mathematics)Basal areaGrowth rateclone (Java method)BotanyStatisticsEcologyWoody plantGeometryGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two-year periodic basal area increments (PBAI) of short-rotation Populus stands were followed through a 6-year rotation in monoclonal plots at three sites to assess variation in response patterns among 20 Populus trichocarpa Torr. & Gray × Populus deltoides Bartr. clones. Data were analyzed using a split-plot model for repeated measurements with the main effect of time and the time × clone interaction partitioned into their linear and quadratic orthogonal components. The form of the mean clone growth response was mainly quadratic with PBAI culminating during the second period at 145–160% of the rotation mean. Increments fell to 95–116% of the rotation mean during the following period. Response variation occurred mainly in the degree of linearity at two sites with clones varying in the rate of growth deceleration during the third period, while quadratic response variation was of prime importance at the third site. Changes in basal area levels among the topmost clones over the last stage of stand development were associated with the divergence in the linear and quadratic responses. Selection on the basis of interaction contrasts of periodic growth from monoclonal plot trials is discussed in terms of sustaining yield improvements and maintaining adaptation to short rotation strategies.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.252
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

Citations17
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicBioenergy crop production and managementFrench-language works237,207