MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018779602 · doi:10.1139/x01-006

Light attenuation by early successional plants of the boreal forest

2001· article· en· W2018779602 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
Christy Shropshire, Robert G. Wagner, Frederick W. Bell, Clarence J. Swanton

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Guelph
KeywordsPteridium aquilinumGrowing seasonBiologyCanopyBotanyCrown (dentistry)Environmental scienceFern

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The influence of eight early successional plant species from the boreal forest on photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) were compared using a controlled plant competition study. Four woody (green alder, Alnus crispa (Ait.) Pursh; upland willow, Salix humilis Marsh.; white birch, Betula papyrifera Marsh.; wild red raspberry, Rubus idaeus L.) and four herbaceous (eastern bracken fern, Pteridium aquilinum L.; bluejoint grass, Calamagrostis canadensis Michx.; large-leaved aster, Aster macrophyllus L.; fireweed, Epilobium angustifolium L.) plant species were studied using an additive density experiment with jack pine (Pinus banksiana Lamb.) seedlings. The transmission of PAR through the plant canopies was measured using a line quantum sensor under six plant density treatments at the time of maximum canopy development each year. Four measures of plant abundance (planting density, actual density, projected leaf area index, and crown cover) were evaluated for their ability to predict PAR transmission through the plant canopies. Visual estimates of crown cover provided the best models each year. Vertical profiles of PAR transmission were used to compare the canopy structure among plant species and were used to refine the models. During the second growing season, increasing crown cover of bluejoint grass and large-leaved aster had the largest influence on PAR. In the third season, green alder, upland willow, and white birch (along with bluejoint grass and fireweed at the jack pine crown level) had the greatest influence on PAR. PAR measurements taken from a nearby forest for several of the plant species indicate that the models developed from our controlled experiment are reasonably applicable to naturally occurring plant populations.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations30
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicPlant Water Relations and Carbon DynamicsFrench-language works237,207