Silvicultural responses of two spruce plantations to midrotation commercial thinning in New Brunswick
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A midrotation commercial thinning experiment conducted in two independent spruce plantations compared several tree selection strategies as both early (age 19 or 24 years) single and double (again at age 30 or 34 years) entries over a 16 year period. A delayed (age 30 or 32 years) single-entry thinning and unthinned portions of the plantations served as references for the other treatments. With the exception of 50% systematic row thinnings, removal intensities were held relatively constant at about 40% of stand basal area. All of the thinning treatments satisfied the objectives of focusing diameter and volume growth on a reduced number of stems and making merchantable volume available during the rotation. Early single-entry thinning allowed 30–50 m 3 /ha to be harvested, increasing quadratic mean diameter and mean merchantable volume per stem at the end of the observation period by 10% and 24%, respectively, over unthinned stands. A second thinning removed an additional 48–64 m 3 /ha and increased diameter and volume gains to 25% and 71%, respectively. Only marginal differences were observed between the tree-selection strategies, and there were no overall gross total or gross merchantable volume gains or losses associated any of the thinning treatments relative to the unthinned plantations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".