Paper birch and lodgepole pine root reinforcement in coarse-, medium-, and fine-textured soils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The increased soil cohesion or reinforcement provided by roots varies among plant species and soil types. This study compared the contribution of paper birch (Betula papyrifera Marsh.) and lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta Dougl. ex Loud. var. latifolia Engelm.) roots to soil shear resistance in two controlled environment experiments. Roots of paper birch and lodgepole pine trees contributed to a significant increase in soil shear resistance, regardless of soil type. At a shear depth of 0.20 to 0.44 m, paper birch contributed greater reinforcement than lodgepole pine. Both birch and pine provided the most root reinforcement in coarse-textured soil and the least reinforcement in medium-textured silt soil. Soil texture, porosity, and shear strength may have affected root branching of the two species, which in turn may have affected root reinforcement. At less than 1 year of age, paper birch trees planted as plugs can substantially increase soil shear strength compared with lodgepole pine in all soil 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".