Intensive short rotation forestry in boreal climates: present and future perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Short rotation forestry (SRF) is regarded as a silvicultural practice employing high-density plantations of fast-growing tree species on fertile land with a rotation period of fewer than 1012 years. I address the challenges and possibilities of SRF applications under the circumstances of a boreal climate, today as well as after anticipated climate change. The implications of a pronounced winter season for the performance of biomass crops are discussed. Poplars, aspens, and willows are superior in boreal SRF because of their fast growth rate in combination with good cold hardiness. These trees can enrich the coniferous forests of boreal regions and increase biodiversity in open agricultural landscapes of the boreal zone. Further, SRF plantations can serve as tools for the amelioration of environmental problems at local (e.g., phytoremediation) and global (e.g., increased greenhouse effect) scales. The biomass yields achieved in boreal SRF and the appropriate production systems appear do not appear to be principally different from warmer regions, but there are some differences with respect to the importance of fertilization, appropriate spacing, and rotation length. The major barriers for a rapid development of SRF appear not to be climatic, technical, or environmental constraints in many boreal regions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".