Changes in root morphology after precommercial thinning in balsam fir stands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Precommercial thinning is often used to control stand density in naturally regenerated balsam fir (Abies balsamea (L.) Mill.) stands. Early stand density control could have beneficial effects on longer term stand stability through a modification of stem shape and root development. To assess the effect of precommercial thinning, two thinned and two unthinned stands were selected. Root sections were collected at 25 cm from the centre of the stem for all major roots (diameter greater than 2 cm). A disk was also cut at breast height level. From these disks, response in radial growth was determined. Detailed root measurements were taken on the sample disks to assess treatment effect on the following variables: asymmetry in root cross-sectional area (CSA) distribution, individual root shape, as well as changes in root shape over time. A quick and pronounced response in root growth occurred. This response was greater than that observed in the trunk. No asymmetry in root CSA distribution was observed at the stand level. Trees allocated more to radial growth above the biological centre of the root both in treated and control stands, but this trend was increased by thinning. Roots also tended to develop T-beam shapes over time, both in control and thinned stands. Most roots initially did not possess an I-beam shape and did not develop one during the course of the study. According to our results, trees respond quickly to the new growing conditions created by thinning by increasing biomass allocation to parts of the roots where mechanical stresses are greater.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".