MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106920787 · doi:10.1139/x06-146

Relationships between root form and growth, stability, and mortality in planted versus naturally regenerated lodgepole pine in north-central British Columbia

2006· article· en· W2106920787 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTree Root and Stability Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPinus contortaBiologyRoot systemHorticultureBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The roots of container-grown and manually planted lodgepole pine, Pinus contorta Dougl. ex Loud. var. latifolia Engelm., are often deformed, potentially impacting their health relative to that of naturally regenerated trees. We evaluated 12 root characteristics to elucidate the type and severity of root deformities in planted pine aged 3–10 years, as well as to determine the impact of root form on their growth and stability. Results showed that root deformity is widespread: 95.0% of planted trees versus 50.9% of naturally regenerated trees had either moderate or severe root deformities. A logistic regression using the 12 root characteristics strongly distinguished between planted and naturally regenerated trees. Aboveground growth form was affected in that planted trees had a lower height-to-diameter ratio than naturally regenerated trees. In young planted trees with low or moderate root deformities, but not in trees with severely deformed roots (65.0% of all planted trees in our study), both height- and diameter-growth rates were higher than in naturally regenerated trees. Growth differences may be attributed to differential resource allocation resulting from translocation inhibition caused by root deformation. In spite of very different root systems, there was no difference in the horizontal stability of planted versus naturally regenerated trees. However, planted trees have a significantly lower root cross-sectional area and may therefore be at a higher risk of mortality, primarily from attack by the Warren root collar weevil, Hylobius warreni Wood.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.626
Threshold uncertainty score0.630

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.211 · 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