Douglas‐fir plantations in Europe: a retrospective test of assisted migration to address climate change
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We evaluate genetic test plantations of North American Douglas-fir provenances in Europe to quantify how tree populations respond when subjected to climate regime shifts, and we examined whether bioclimate envelope models developed for North America to guide assisted migration under climate change can retrospectively predict the success of these provenance transfers to Europe. The meta-analysis is based on long-term growth data of 2800 provenances transferred to 120 European test sites. The model was generally well suited to predict the best performing provenances along north-south gradients in Western Europe, but failed to predict superior performance of coastal North American populations under continental climate conditions in Eastern Europe. However, model projections appear appropriate when considering additional information regarding adaptation of Douglas-fir provenances to withstand frost and drought, even though the model partially fails in a validation against growth traits alone. We conclude by applying the partially validated model to climate change scenarios for Europe, demonstrating that climate trends observed over the last three decades warrant changes to current use of Douglas-fir provenances in plantation forestry throughout Western and Central Europe.
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 | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".