Dispersal and viability of seeds from cones in tops of harvested loblolly pines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Seed supply is one of the most important determinants of successful natural regeneration. We conducted a study to determine the potential contribution of cones in the tops of harvested loblolly pines (Pinus taeda L.) to the stand's seed supply if trees were felled after seed maturation but before dispersal. Closed cones, collected in October 1996, were stored in wire cages with periodic removals over 2 years to determine the number and viability of extracted seeds. Storage sites were an opening in a seed-tree stand and a closed-canopy pine-hardwood stand in southeastern Arkansas. Of the initial 83 viable seeds/cone, 73% had dispersed in the opening and 63% in the closed stand by March 1997, which is considered the end of the normal dispersal period from standing trees. By October 1997, only 1 viable seed/cone remained in the opening and 5 viable seeds/cone in the closed stand, indicating rather complete dispersal or mortality of seeds by the first summer after harvest. Results indicate that cones in tops of trees cut during the 2-month period after seed maturation and before substantial dispersal can make an important contribution to the stand's seed supply, especially in reproduction cutting methods where most of the trees are harvested.
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".