Spatial dynamics of radial growth and growth efficiency in residual<i>Pinus resinosa</i>following aggregated retention harvesting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Variable retention harvest systems are encouraged to promote complexity in managed forests, and aggregated retention has been suggested as a means of reducing moisture stress in residual trees. We studied the impacts of within-aggregate position on growth and foliar physiology to better understand the spatial dynamics of residual-tree responses to aggregated retention harvests in even-aged Pinus resinosa Ait. stands. Distance from edge and edge aspect influenced radial growth, volume increment, and growth efficiency, but only edge aspect affected foliar nitrogen content. Spatial variables had no significant relationships with foliar carbon isotope ratios (δ13C). Increases in radial growth, volume increment, and growth efficiency following harvesting were greatest near edges and in the northeastern quadrants of aggregates that received mechanical understory release treatments, and lowest in the southeastern quadrant of aggregates and near aggregate centers. Foliar nitrogen content was highest in the southwestern quadrants of aggregates that received understory release treatments, and lowest in the northwestern quadrants of aggregates. Our results suggest spatial relationships are important determinants of residual-tree responses to aggregated retention harvests.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".