MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150752052 · doi:10.5558/tfc86110-1

Further observations on sudden diebacks of Scots pine in the European Alps

2010· article· en· W2150752052 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Paolo Gonthier, Luana Giordano, G. Nicolotti

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicTree-ring climate responses
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScots pineDendrochronologyAbiotic componentDrynessCrown (dentistry)ForestryGeographyClimate changePhysical geographyEcologyBiologyPinus <genus>Botany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the beginning of the 1990s, significant mortality of Scots pine trees has been observed in inner valleys of the Alps. The objectives of this work were to investigate and describe the aetiology of a Scots pine dieback in the Aosta Valley (western Italian Alps) in 2005. Surveys were conducted in three forest stands. Crown transparency was assessed to evaluate the incidence and severity of dieback symptoms. Phytosanitary surveys were also performed. The time series of the major climatic parameters was analyzed in order to identify common climatic anomalies between the dieback of 2005 and similar dieback episodes in other periods and in other areas of the western Alps. Dendrochronological analyses were performed to assess the relationship between tree-ring widths and climatic parameters. The lack of primary biotic agents and the low frequency of secondary pathogens suggest an abiotic origin of diebacks. The time series analysis shows that two consecutive years with a value of summer dryness index below 1.5 preceded the diebacks. Tree-ring width and summer dryness index were strongly and significantly associated. Key words: climate change, forest dieback, Scots pine, crown transparency, ecophysiology, tree-ring width

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations21
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicTree-ring climate responsesFrench-language works237,207