MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104921950 · doi:10.1139/x07-172

Allometry and size structure of trees in two ancient snow forests in coastal British Columbia

2008· article· en· W2104921950 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Roberta Parish, Gordon D. Nigh, Joseph A. Antos

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTree Root and Stability Studies
Canadian institutionsGovernment of British ColumbiaUniversity of Victoria
FundersCenter for Innovative MedicineMashhad University of Medical Sciences
KeywordsTsugaChamaecyparisCrown (dentistry)AllometryDiameter at breast heightCanopyUnderstoryTree allometryBiologyThujaForestryCoarse woody debrisEcologyCinnamomum camphoraSequoiaBotanyGeographyBiomass (ecology)Habitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Shade-tolerant trees that start in the understory but ultimately reach the canopy persist through different microhabitat conditions during their ontogeny. We evaluate how the height to diameter ratio and the crown ratio (crown length/tree height) change during development and differ among four coniferous species ( Abies amabilis (Dougl. ex Loud.) Dougl. ex J. Forbes, Chamaecyparis nootkatensis (D. Don) Spach, Tsuga mertensiana (Bong.) Carrière, and Tsuga heterophylla (Ref.) Sarg.) in ancient forests. At two sites, we measured diameter, height, and height to the base of live crown for trees ≥4.0 cm diameter at breast height in four 0.25 ha plots. For each species, we constructed models of height based on diameter and crown length using part of the data for model development and part as the test data set. Models predicting tree height were effective for all species, and adding crown length considerably improved the prediction over diameter alone. The height to diameter ratio increased until the subcanopy and then decreased for two shade-tolerant species (A. amabilis and T. heterophylla) but decreased linearly throughout ontogeny for C. nootkatensis. Crown ratio increased as trees became larger except for C. nootkatensis, where the reverse occurred. Differences in allometric relationship among species reflect patterns of crown development and also suggest different approaches to a common structural constraint in these forests: heavy snow loads.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.196

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.248 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicTree Root and Stability StudiesFrench-language works237,207