MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135098377 · doi:10.1093/forestry/cpp025

Radial growth response of black spruce roots and stems to commercial thinning in the boreal forest

2009· article· en· W2135098377 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michael J. Vincent, Cornélia Krause, S. Y. Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueForestry An International Journal of Forest Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsFPInnovationsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThinningTaigaContext (archaeology)BorealCompetition (biology)ProductivityBlack spruceForestryForest managementDiameter at breast heightGrowth rateHorticultureBotanyEnvironmental scienceBiologyAgronomyAgroforestryMathematicsEcologyGeographyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Black spruce is one of the most important boreal tree species in Canada. In the current ecosystem-based management context, commercial thinning (CT) could be a sound choice for attaining sustainable forest management while still achieving maximum returns on competitive timber markets. Through stand density regulation, CT aims to increase tree growth and enhances stand productivity, but the pattern and level of treatment responses are still unknown. This study examined the radial growth response of roots and stems to CT in 10 thinned stands and their controls. A split-plot unbalanced model was developed to describe growth variations over time. The study shows that CT leads to an increase in the radial growth of stems and roots for at least 10 years after the treatment. The 10-year post-treatment radial growth increment of stems is from 20 to 100 per cent higher than the pre-treatment 10-year mean growth. Response depends upon tree diameter and competition, with the biggest trees exhibiting the lowest response to the treatment. Nevertheless, these variables only explain a fraction of the response (R2 = 0.0511), suggesting that much of the observed variation may be due to variability between the stands and between trees within a stand. Moreover, stem growth response is correlated with, but lags behind root growth response. This study suggests that CT results may be enhanced by the selection of retained trees based on initial diameter at breast height.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.399

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations79
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueForestry An International Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicForest ecology and managementFrench-language works237,207