MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076966944 · doi:10.1139/x09-126

Radial growth response of white oak to climate in eastern North America

2009· article· en· W2076966944 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
David C. LeBlanc, Mark Terrell

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicTree-ring climate responses
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPennsylvania State University
KeywordsPrecipitationGrowing seasonClimate changeEnvironmental scienceWater balanceRange (aeronautics)DendrochronologyPhenologyPhysical geographyClimatologyGeographyEcologyBiologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Predicting forest responses to climate change requires an understanding of the cause–effect relationships linking climate to tree growth. Dendroecological analyses across sites that span climate gradients provide one means of characterizing such relationships. Dendroecological analyses for white oak ( Quercus alba L.) at 149 sites spanning the species range in eastern North America identified spatially replicated growth–climate associations. Early growing season site water balance variables for the year of annual ring formation had the strongest, most spatially replicated associations with growth. There was little evidence of phenological variation of these associations related to the latitudinal temperature gradient. Most spatial variation in growth–climate associations was along an east-to-west precipitation gradient. Radial growth was most strongly correlated with site water balance at sites in the northwest quadrant of the range, characterized by continental climate and high interannual variability in precipitation. There was little evidence that dormant season temperature affects white oak growth, even at the northern range limit. Correlations with dormant season precipitation were common in the northwest part of the range, where winter soil water recharge may be more variable. Spatial replication was a useful criterion for distinguishing growth–climate correlations that reflect cause–effect relationships.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.609
Threshold uncertainty score0.976

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations28
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicTree-ring climate responsesFrench-language works237,207