Peatland pines as climate indicators? A regional comparison of the climatic influence on Scots pine growth in Sweden
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Six tree-ring chronologies from Sweden were analyzed to assess if Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) growing on peatlands are useful as annually resolved climate indicators. Also, climategrowth relationships were compared with those of pines growing on nearby dry sites to evaluate if pines from both environments may be combined to yield climate information. While temperatures in spring and summer had positive influences on peatland pine growth, precipitation responses ranged from negative in the north to positive in the south. Climate growth response patterns differed between peatland and neighboring dry sites, where climatic information in peatland pines was weaker. Added to the direct effect of growth-year climate, is the response of peatland pines to water table variations, a function of climate over several years, likely causing annual growth to reflect a synthesis of climate over a long period. Scots pine climate growth responses, in both environments, changed throughout the 20th century, corresponding to changes in temperature and precipitation patterns in Sweden. Decreasing growth trends since the late 1970s may be a result of late 20th century change to a warmer and wetter climate, possibly related to a strengthening of the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) in recent decades.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".