Aboveground and belowground biomass and sapwood area allometric equations for six boreal tree species of northern Manitoba
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Allometric equations were developed relating aboveground biomass, coarse root biomass, and sapwood area to stem diameter at 17 study sites located in the boreal forests near Thompson, Man. The six species studied were trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx.), paper birch (Betula papyrifera Marsh.), black spruce (Picea mariana (Mill.) BSP), jack pine (Pinus banksiana Lamb.), tamarack (Larix laricina (Du Roi) Koch.), and willow (Salix spp.). Stands ranged in age from 4 to 130 years and were categorized as well or poorly drained. Stem diameter ranged from 0.1 to 23.7 cm. Stem diameter was measured at both the soil surface (D 0 ) and breast height (DBH). The relationship between biomass and diameter, fitted on a loglog scale, changed significantly at ~3 cm DBH, suggesting that allometry differed between saplings and older trees. To eliminate this nonlinearity, a model of form log 10 Y = a + b(log 10 D) + c(AGE) + d(log 10 D × AGE) was used, where D is stem diameter, AGE is stand age, and the cross product is the interaction between diameter and age. Most aboveground biomass equations (N = 326) exhibited excellent fits (R 2 > 0.95). Coarse root biomass equations (N = 205) exhibited good fits (R 2 > 0.90). Both D 0 and DBH were excellent (R 2 > 0.95) sapwood area predictors (N = 413). Faster growing species had significantly higher ratios of sapwood area to stem area than did slower growing species. Nonlinear aspects of some of the pooled biomass equations serve as a caution against extrapolating allometric equations beyond the original sample diameter range.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it