Pollination and seed production in western white pine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The reproductive biology of western white pine ( Pinus monticola Dougl. ex D. Don) at the Saanich seed orchard (SSO; a coastal seedling seed orchard) and the Kalamalka seed orchard (KSO; an interior clonal seed orchard) is described. Seed-cone development and morphology determine seed potential and affect filled seed production. Seed potential was high, commonly over 200 seeds per cone and filled seeds per cone averaged 50–60 at both orchards in 1999 from open pollinations combined with operational supplemental mass pollinations (OP-SMP). Filled seeds per cone at SSO in 2004 averaged 115 with open pollinations and OP-SMP. About 30% of ovules aborted before pollination. Another 25% aborted probably because of self-incompatibility at fertilization. Seed efficiency (SEF) was only 5% at KSO with open pollination but increased to 30% with OP-SMP. SEF was the same at SSO with or without OP-SMP. Reproductive success was very low at KSO without OP-SMP but increased to about 10%, similar to that of SSO, with OP-SMP. The optimal time for control pollinations was at cone stages 4 and 5 and optimal amount of pollen per pollination bag was 0.3–0.4 mL. Western white pine is a very good seed producer and can be easily managed in seed orchards to give very high seed production per cone and per tree.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".