Survival of artificially regenerated Scots pine on till soils with respect to varying dielectric properties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Artificial regeneration to Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) has faced substantial economical losses in Finnish Lapland on sites underlain by glacial tills and formerly covered by stands dominated by Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.). We studied the survival of pine seedlings and saplings with respect to soil dielectric permittivity (ε), as dependent on soil water content (θ v ), of ploughed tills. The ε values (θ v ) were determined beneath 10 500 pines varying in age between 2 and 41 years and growing on 21 sites, 500 per site. Based on the logistic regression models, the survival rate of 2- to 7-year-old seedlings was independent of the soil ε (i.e., θ v ). In contrast, a significant correlation between the survival rate of 12- to 16-year-old saplings and soil ε was observed. In this age-class, a survival rate of 50% with ε 50 = 15.1, with ε 50 = 17.0 for planted saplings and ε 50 = 12.7 for sowed saplings, were obtained. Of the 2000 pine trees aged between 20 and 41 years, 96.5% were observed to be growing on dry tills with ε < 15 with mean ε = 9.9. The results of this study suggest that artificial regeneration of Scots pine in Lapland is risky on moist and wet tills (ε > 15, θ v > 0.27 cm 3 ·cm 3 ).
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".