Long-term effects of mechanized stump treatment against Heterobasidion annosum root rot in Picea abies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Airborne Heterobasidion annosum (Fr.) Bref. sensu lato infections can be controlled by winter thinning or by mechanically spreading urea or Phlebiopsis gigantea (Fr.) Jülich spores on stump surfaces during summer thinning operations. The long-term outcomes of these control methods when applied as part of the conventional forest operations are unclear. We studied the rot incidence and population structure of H. annosum in plots of Picea abies (L.) Karst. thinned in winter or thinned in summer with and without treatment of the stumps. Plots were distributed among 11 stands in Sweden representing two different land use histories: forest and agricultural. After 13 years, the effect of stump treatment on rot incidence was only evident in stands on former agricultural land. In stands planted on former forest land with higher levels of preexisting rot than on former agricultural land, the expansion of preexisting genets of H. annosum might have masked the effects of stump protection. In former forest land, unprotected summer plots showed a greater diversity of H. annosum genotypes and a smaller number of trees infected by each genet than in protected plots, suggesting that protection treatments prevented the establishment of new genets, which may result in a reduced rot incidence in the future.
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".