MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2015281592 · doi:10.5539/jas.v1n2p74

Aboveground Biomass of Selected Provenances of Acacia Mangium and Acacia Aulacocarpa Multiple-leadered Trees

2009· article· en· W2015281592 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sapari Mat, Mohd-Zaki Hamzah, Rosenani Abu-Bakar, M.F. Ramlan, Hazandy Abdul Hamid, Abdul Latib Senin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistério da Ciência, Tecnologia e InovaçãoKementerian Sains, Teknologi dan InovasiCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation
KeywordsAcacia mangiumBiomass (ecology)Diameter at breast heightAcaciaBiologyBotanyAgronomyForestryGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acacia mangium Willd. and Acacia aulacocarpa A. Cunn Ex. Benth are two important Acacias for biomass production.Being multiple-leader (ML) and fast growing species, both species are the best bet for carbon sequestration andbio-energy supplementary. The main objective of this study was to assess the aboveground biomass and to deriveaboveground biomass equations of these species and provenances. Destructive sampling was carried out with 36samples per species and diameter at breast height (Dbh) and categorized into three classes namely small (11-15 cm),medium (16-20 cm) and big (21-25 cm) for A. mangium and 6-10 cm, 11-15 cm and 16-20 cm for A. aulacocarparespectively. A. mangium from SW of Boset WP (PNG) produced 380.83 t/ha of aboveground biomass, Captain BillyRoad (QLD), Bansbach WP (PNG) (224.44 t/ha) and Russel and Gap CK (QLD) (49.63 t/ha) while for A. aulacocarpa;provenance from Arufi E Morehead WP (PNG) (171.88 t/ha), W. Morehead (PNG) (150.90 t/ha), Samford (QLD)(63.87 t/ha) and 3K S Mt. Larcom (QLD) (25.32 t/ha) respectively.

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)0.000
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural Science→Same topicForest ecology and management→French-language works237,207→