Potential productivity of aspen cohorts originating from fire, harvesting, and tree-fall gaps on two deposit types in northwestern Quebec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Height growth of trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx.) stands originating from three different disturbance types (fire, clearcut, and tree-fall gap) was compared on two different deposits (glacial till and lacustrine clay) in the Abitibi region in northwestern Quebec using stem analysis techniques. Several soil properties were also measured to investigate relationships between soil properties and aspen growth. Height growth of aspen was not significantly different among stands of different origins, although on both deposits and at all stages of growth, trees originating from fire were the tallest. Differences in total height among stands of different origins were less than 3 m at 50 years of age. The greatest differences in height growth among stands were expected at younger stages likely because of lower light levels for trees originating from gaps at this stage, but the opposite was observed; height growth differences for 5-year intervals were greater for taller trees. Height growth was greater on clay than on till soils but only for trees greater than 15 m. Soil pH and availability of nitrogen and calcium were correlated with aspen height growth on till soils, while only exchangeable calcium was related to this property on clay soils. Fire had beneficial effects on soils, because it increased soil pH and exchangeable cations. However, these effects did not significantly affect tree growth over one or two rotations.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".