MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120543862 · doi:10.1139/x04-191

Impacts of black stain root disease in recently formed mortality centers in the piñon-juniper woodlands of southwestern Colorado

2005· article· en· W2120543862 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Holly S. J. Kearns, William R. Jacobi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJuniperShrubHerbaceous plantBiologyWoodlandBark (sound)Woody plantBotanyForestryHorticultureEcologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thirty discrete black stain root disease (BSRD) mortality centers, caused by Leptographium wageneri (Kendr.) Wingf. var. wageneri, were examined in 1999 to determine the effects of BSRD on the composition and structure of piñon–juniper woodlands at the tree, shrub, and herbaceous plant levels and on tree-seedling regeneration. In these recently formed mortality centers, the majority (68%) of all piñon (Pinus edulis Engelm.) was dead, 76% of piñon were affected by BSRD, and 70% had evidence of piñon ips bark beetle (Ips confusus Leconte) attack. BSRD mortality centers had a mean area of 0.28 ha (range 0.07 to 0.63 ha). There were no statistically significant (p > 0.05) differences in shrub composition, cover, or diversity between mortality centers and the unaffected surrounding woodlands. Herbaceous plant cover was significantly greater (p < 0.001) within mortality centers and frequency responses were species specific. There were no significant (p = 0.629) differences in the density of piñon regeneration inside mortality centers compared with outside mortality centers. The pathogen was regularly isolated from piñon roots dead for 5–8 years and once from a root dead for 16 years. The rate of radial expansion of mortality centers averaged 1.1 m/year (0.07 SE). The rate of mortality center expansion was not significantly (p > 0.05) related to available water-holding capacity, percent organic matter, pH of soils, piñon density, or any other site data recorded.

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)0.000
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 score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.173

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations10
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicForest Insect Ecology and ManagementFrench-language works237,207