Relationship between heartwood radius and early radial growth, tree age, and climate in <i>Pinus canariensis</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heartwood radius at breast height was studied in 31 sampling sites from natural stands of Canary Islands pine (Pinus canariensis Chr. Sm. ex DC) covering the natural range of the species. After withdrawal of defective and nonheartwood samples, 1640 sound radial cores ranging in age from 30 to 265 years were analysed. Linearized models for the prediction of heartwood radius at breast height were obtained using stepwise regression methods. The best fit was attained including age and early radial growth variables (radius of the 25 or to the 50 inner rings), while stem radius inside bark and whole radial growth rate did not improve the prediction. Sampling sites were classified into five climate types, established according to the main plant communities associated with Pinus canariensis. The use of separate models for each climate type led to a significant reduction of the residual variance compared with multiple climate models. This confirmed that climate is an essential factor in heartwood development in Pinus canariensis even when 5173% of heartwood radius variation is explained by age and early growth. For fixed values of age and early growth, models predicted wider heartwood in drier climate types than in wet and high-altitude (supra-nubius) climate types.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".