False rings in jack pine and black spruce trees from eastern Manitoba as indicators of dry summers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
False rings (FRs) are a tree-ring anomaly that can be used to better understand tree growth and potentially reconstruct past climatic events. The main objective of this study was to explore the association between FRs and climate, especially drought occurrence. Sampling was conducted in Nopiming Provincial Park. Wood cores were extracted from jack pine ( Pinus banksiana Lamb.) in five stands and from co-occurring black spruce ( Picea mariana (Mill.) BSP) in three of these stands. After cross-dating, earlywood, latewood, and total ring width were measured on all cores. All FRs were identified, and their position within a tree ring was determined. Both species showed similar radial growth and FR patterns. Jack pine and to a lesser extent black spruce both showed abundant FRs in the juvenile period. Springs with cool and snowy conditions and summers with severe drought were associated with a higher frequency of FRs. These anomalies could be formed partly in response to timing of the start of the growing season and to conditions during that growing season that lead to interruption and subsequent resumption of normal growth. Jack pine radial growth was found to be more sensitive to precipitation, whereas that of black spruce was more sensitive to temperature.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".