Post-spacing mortality of lodgepole pine from armillaria root disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To evaluate the threat of armillaria root disease in precommercially thinned lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta var. latifolia), a total of 66 15 × 15-m plots were established in dense lodgepole pine regeneration, 18 to 21 years after harvest, on three infested sites near Hinton, Alberta. Three treatments (2.5-m spacing, 1.5-m spacing and an unspaced control) were randomly applied to plots having similar densities and levels of mortality. After 11 years there was no significant difference among the treatments in cumulative percent mortality. Based on observed levels of mortality, it would appear that spacing need not be avoided in infested stands, although it likely would be prudent to space more closely than 2.5 m in younger stands and in parts of stands having more than 5–10% mortality. Key words: precommercial thinning, spacing, armillaria root disease, Armillaria ostoyae
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.004 | 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 teacher head, 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".