Root structure of western hemlock and western redcedar in single- and mixed-species stands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Root structure of western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla (Raf.) Sarg.) and western redcedar (Thuja plicata Donn. ex D. Don) was studied in single- and mixed-species stands of hemlock and western redcedar in Capilano River watershed, University of British Columbia Malcolm Knapp Research Forest, and Mission, southern coastal British Columbia. We sampled roots using a tree-to-tree trench excavation method. In each stand, roots were collected from three randomly located trenches using a 20 × 20 × 10 cm template along (i) a soil depth gradient: forest floor (FF), 0- to 10-cm (MS1), and 10- to 20-cm mineral soil layers (MS2) and (ii) a lateral soil gradient (tree-to-tree trenches). Hemlockredcedar mixtures had the greatest root density, followed by pure hemlock and redcedar stands. In both pure hemlock stands and hemlock-redcedar mixtures, root density of all size classes (fine, medium, and coarse roots) decreased with increasing soil depth, whereas that of pure redcedar stands peaked at the MS1 layer. Density of roots along the lateral gradient varied among stand types and root size classes. Density of coarse roots was higher towards tree stems, while that of fine and medium roots was more evenly distributed. In the forest floor of the hemlockredcedar mixtures, root density of all sizes except that of redcedar coarse roots was not related to the distance to stems, but fine root density of hemlock was greater than that of redcedar. The highest root density in the hemlockredcedar mixtures may indicate the presence of overlapping and intermingling roots and intense competition for available soil resources.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".