Cultures intercalaires avec arbres feuillus : quel potentiel pour le Québec?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hardwood plantations constitute a good opportunity to intensify the production of high-quality timber. However, in the absence of short-term investment returns, their economic benefits seem uncertain for landowners. Intercropping systems, which are stimulating interest in many temperate countries, could constitute an innovative way to increase the use of hardwood plantations and maximize their profitability, in particular in the mixedwood plain ecozone in Quebec. Results from recent studies show that intercrops do not usually affect tree growth and could even stimulate it in some cases. Furthermore, in addition to their various environmental benefits related to soil fertility, biodiversity and landscape, intercropping systems are quite often more profitable than conventional forest plantations. Finally, even though trees can compete with crops for light, water and nutriments, decreasing crop productivity, the technical itinerary specific to intercropping systems allows for the control of at least part of this competition. The development perspectives of intercropping systems are discussed, taking into account the biophysical and socio-economic context specific to the mixedwood plain ecozone in Quebec. Key words: environmental benefits, high-value wood, resource competition, tree growth, mixedwood plain ecozone, technical itinerary, hardwood plantation, crop productivity, profitability, intercropping systems
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.001 |
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".