MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996395093 · doi:10.5558/tfc85604-4

Forest disease records on eastern white pine in Atlantic Canada: 1950 to 1996

2009· article· en· W1996395093 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
K. J. Harrison

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest Service
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyForestryBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Between 1936 and 1996, the Forest Insect and Disease Survey (FIDS) of the Canadian Forest Service of Natural Resources Canada surveyed eastern white pine (Pinus strobus L.) throughout Atlantic Canada. During those years, FIDS reported its insect and disease findings in a wide variety of regional and national reports and in the scientific literature. The National Forest Health Database contains these electronic records and indicates the distribution and relative importance of forest diseases and fungi for many tree species in Atlantic Canada. This paper is a frequency analysis of the fungal diseases recorded from the Atlantic provinces in the National Forest Health Database and reported in the various Maritime, Newfoundland and national FIDS reports. The significant eastern white pine diseases (e.g., white pine blister rust – Cronartium ribicola J.C. Fisch.) that are established in Atlantic Canada as well as other diseases that are found elsewhere in Canada, but not yet in the Atlantic provinces are discussed. Occurrence data for 40 of the less frequently collected fungal species are presented in a summary table. Key words: white pine blister rust, Cronartium ribicola, eastern white pine, Pinus strobus, Scleroderris canker, Gremmeniella abietina, Annosus root rot, Heterobasidion annosum, white pine root decline, Leptographium procerum, needle cast, Lophodermium pinastri, brown felt fungus, Septobasidium pinicola, Atlantic Canada, forest disease

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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.206
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations4
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicForest Insect Ecology and ManagementFrench-language works237,207