MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975102124 · doi:10.1139/b09-013

Climatic determinants of berry crops in the boreal forest of the southwestern Yukon

2009· article· en· W1975102124 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Charles J. Krebs, Rudy Boonstra, K. Cowcill, Alice J. Kenney

Bibliographic record

VenueBotany · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and fungal interactions
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersForskningsrådet om Hälsa, Arbetsliv och VälfärdParks CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaArctic Institute of North America
KeywordsBerryBiologyQuadratBorealBotanyForestryHorticultureEcologyGeographyShrub

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Berry crops in the southwestern Yukon were quantified from 1997 to 2008 at 10 locations along 210 km of the Alaska and Haines highways. We tested the hypothesis that the size of berry crops could be predicted from spring and summer temperature and rainfall of years t, t–1 (1 year prior), and t–2 (2 years prior). Six common species were studied in the boreal forest of the Kluane region: Arctostaphylos rubra (Rehd. & Wils.) Fern., Arctostaphylos uva-ursi (L.) Spreng. s.l., Empetrum nigrum L., Vaccinium vitis-idaea L., Geocaulon lividum (Richards) Fern, and Shepherdia canadensis (L.) Nutt.. For the first five species we counted berries on fixed 40 cm × 40 cm quadrats to obtain an index of berry production for the Kluane region for each of the 12 years, and for S. canadensis we counted berries on two tagged branches of 10 bushes at each location. Stepwise multiple regressions were utilized to predict the size of berry crops for each species. For all species, predictive equations could explain statistically 80%–96% of the variation in berry crops. Different weather variables characterized each plant species, and there was no common weather regression that could explain the variation in berry crops in all species. Rainfall and temperature from years t–1 and t–2 were typically the significant predictors. There was no indication of a periodicity in berry production, and 43%–60% of the quadrats counted had large berry crops at one year intervals, while other quadrats never had a high crop during the study interval.

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)0.000
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 score0.865
Threshold uncertainty score0.268

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations75
Published2009
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBotanySame topicPlant and fungal interactionsFrench-language works237,207