Dendrochronological responses to the 24 October 1992 tornado at Sunset Crater, northern Arizona
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper documents tree-ring responses to a historic tornado and reevaluates prehistoric tree-ring changes seen in archaeological wood of Wupatki Ruin used to date the 11th-century eruption of Sunset Crater. The historic tornado occurred at Sunset Crater, northern Arizona, on 24 October 1992, and trees within areas damaged by the tornado survived the event and continue living today. The objectives of this research were to document their ring-growth changes and to consider the possibility of tornadoes as a candidate disturbance for the prehistoric ring-growth changes of Wupatki. About half of the trees sampled within areas damaged by the tornado show one or more dendrochronological responses to that event, including ring-width release, reaction wood, ring-width suppression, and (or) reduced latewood. Tornado damage is not a likely candidate for having caused the abrupt ring-width changes at AD 10641065 seen at Wupatki. However, five living ponderosa pines (Pinus ponderosa Dougl. ex P. & C. Laws.) at Sunset Crater experienced abrupt and severe suppressions in ring growth beginning decades ago and continuing today. No single disturbance seems obvious for causing these growth suppressions, but further research is merited to find the cause of these modern suppressions to propose a new candidate explanation for the AD 1064 suppression.
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) | 0.002 | 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".