Comparing productivity of pure and mixed Douglas-fir and western hemlock plantations in the Pacific Northwest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We studied pure and 50/50 mixtures of Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco) and western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla (Raf.) Sarg.) plantations to compare attained total yields between mixed-species stands as opposed to monocultures of equal densities. Whether overall stand density influences this outcome has not been adequately investigated, and to address this we included three density levels (494, 1111, and 1729 trees/ha) in the analysis. At age 12, as components of the mixed stands, Douglas-fir exhibited greater height, diameter, and individual-tree volume than western hemlock at all densities. At 494 and 1111 trees/ha the monocultures had a higher volume per hectare than the mixed stand, but at 1729 trees/ha the mixed stand appeared to be just as productive as the pure stands. The increase in productivity by the mixture at high densities seems to have resulted from the partial stratification observed and most likely also from better use of the site resources. Because of this, less interspecific competition was probably experienced in the mixed stand than intraspecific competition in the pure stands. This study shows the important role density plays in the productivity of mixed stands and thus in comparing mixed and pure stands.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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 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".