MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012569450 · doi:10.1071/bt04149

Allometry for estimating aboveground tree biomass in tropical and subtropical eucalypt woodlands: towards general predictive equations

2005· article· en· W2012569450 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Journal of Botany · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsOkanagan University CollegeOkanagan College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTree allometryAllometryAkaike information criterionSubtropicsBiomass (ecology)WoodlandEcologyTree (set theory)MathematicsBiologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A fundamental tool in carbon accounting is tree-based allometry, whereby easily measured variables can be used to estimate aboveground biomass (AGB). To explore the potential of general allometry we combined raw datasets from 14 different woodland species, mainly eucalypts, from 11 sites across the Northern Territory, Queensland and New South Wales. Access to the raw data allowed two predictor variables, tree diameter (at 1.3-m height; D) and tree height (H), to be used singly or in various combinations to produce eight candidate models. Following natural log (ln) transformation, the data, consisting of 220 individual trees, were re-analysed in two steps: first as 20 species–site-specific AGB equations and, second, as a single general AGB equation. For each of the eight models, a comparison of the species–site-specific with the general equations was made with the Akaike information criterion (AIC). Further model evaluation was undertaken by a leave-one-out cross-validation technique. For each of the model forms, the species–site-specific equations performed better than the general equation. However, the best performing general equation, ln(AGB) = –2.0596 + 2.1561 ln(D) + 0.1362 (ln(H))2, was only marginally inferior to the species–site-specific equations. For the best general equation, back-transformed predicted v. observed values (on a linear scale) were highly concordant, with a slope of 0.99. The only major deviation from this relationship was due to seven large, hollow trees (more than 35% loss of cross-sectional stem area at 1.3 m) at a single species–site combination. Our best-performing general model exhibited remarkable stability across species and sites, when compared with the species–site equations. We conclude that there is encouraging evidence that general predictive equations can be developed across sites and species for Australia’s woodlands. This simplifies the conversion of long-term inventory measurements into AGB estimates and allows more resources to be focused on the extension of such inventories.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score0.377

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.256 · 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