Crown shyness in lodgepole pine stands of varying stand height, density, and site index in the upper foothills of Alberta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Crown shyness is the empty space between crowns in fully stocked stands that is not related to tree-fall gaps. The objectives of this study were to determine the stand and site factors that control crown shyness in lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta Dougl. ex Loud.) stands and to evaluate whether stands experiencing crown shyness compensate for leaf area losses by maintaining longer crowns. We measured canopy closure (i.e., the inverse of crown shyness), crown radius and length, and green litterfall in stands of various height, relative density, and site index. Canopy closure decreased with stand height and increased with site index and relative density. Green litterfall increased with height and relative density. Crown radius and crown length reached a plateau by 8-10 m height, despite increased spacing between tree boles with increasing stand height. Crown radius increased with height and site index but declined with relative density and slenderness coefficient. Crown length also increased with height and site index but declined with slenderness coefficient. Despite the fact that, in tall stands, where >50% of the sky was not covered by crowns, there was not an accompanying increase in crown length to take advantage of the apparent increase in light transmission to the lower crown.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".