Polymorphic site index curves for jack pine in Northern Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stem-analysis data from dominant and codominant trees were collected from 383 plots located in fully stocked, even-aged, undisturbed mature jack pine stands. Separate site index curves were independently formulated for four regions of northern Ontario using the Newnham constrained nonlinear regression model; these formulations were used for comparing regional site index curves at three levels of site index (10 m, 15 m and 20 m).Comparisons showed that no significant differences existed between the four regional curves as well as with previously published site index curves for the North Central Region. Each of the four regions had similar polymorphic height-growth patterns; therefore, data for the four regions were combined and a single formulation was used to develop a polymorphic set of site index curves for all of northern Ontario. We found that poor sites in each region had almost linear height growth up to 100 years breast-height age, but for each region height growth became more curvilinear with increasing site index. The recommended site index curves for northern Ontario are based on a formulation using only data from plots 100 years and less but this formulation was not significantly different from a formulation using only data from plots 80 years and less, or a formulation that included all data from plots older than 100 years breast-height age.Comparisons were made between our northern Ontario curves and other jack pine site index curves for Ontario as well as curves for other areas of Canada and the United States. These comparisons generally showed considerable older age differences. Reasons for these differences are uncertain but could be due to differences in the amount and kind of data used for these other curves, could be due to differences in analytical methods, or could be due to regional differences in climate, soil and topography. Key words: site quality evaluation, polymorphic height growth, regional site index curves, site index prediction equations, comparisons among site index curves.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".