MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126187224 · doi:10.5558/tfc76743-5

Nontimber forest product industry in Canada: Scope and research needs

2000· article· en· W2126187224 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Luc Duchesne, John C. Zasada, Iain J. Davidson‐Hunt

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPlant-Derived Bioactive Compounds
Canadian institutionsCanadian Forest Service
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForest productBusinessRevenueSustainabilityProduct (mathematics)BiodiversityScope (computer science)ChinaAgricultural economicsNatural resource economicsAgricultural scienceAgroforestryForest managementGeographyEconomicsForestryEcologyFinanceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With a current yearly output of $241 million per year nontimber forest products (NTFP) contribute significantly to the welfare of rural and First Nations communities in Canada. Maple sap products, wild mushrooms and wild fruits are the most important NTFP for consumption both in Canada and abroad. However, because of increased access to international markets by entrepreneurs along with a growing international demand for NTFP it may be possible to double or triple Canada's harvest of NTFP. Further development of this industry should be associated with adequate training of harvesters in terms of NTFP biology in order to maximize profits while achieving biological sustainability. As well, research should emphasize the domestication of specific NTFP to meet growing demand, increase revenues and promote biodiversity conservation. Key words: forest economics, biodiversity, forest biology, nontimber forest products.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.191

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.008
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations13
Published2000
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicPlant-Derived Bioactive CompoundsFrench-language works237,207