MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153540049 · doi:10.1139/x03-214

Tree rings from a European beech forest chronosequence are useful for detecting growth trends and carbon sequestration

2004· article· en· W2153540049 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marco Bascietto, Paolo Cherubini, Giuseppe Scarascia Mugnozza

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicTree-ring climate responses
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChronosequenceBeechForestryEcosystemStock (firearms)Carbon sequestrationCarbon stockForest ecologyEnvironmental scienceAgroforestryLarix gmeliniiSilvicultureEcologyLarchGeographyBiologyClimate changeCarbon dioxide

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Past carbon (C) storage trends were estimated using dendroecological methods in a beech chronosequence in central Germany. Raw-ring-width chronologies, sensitivity curves, and carbon uptake trends were developed for 70-, 110-, and 150-year-old (S70, S110, and S150), even-aged stands. Ecosystem C stock and net ecosystem productivity (NEP C ) were computed as the sum of the C stock and fluxes of the soil, the aboveground compartment, and the estimated belowground compartment. The ecosystem C stock ranged from 216 t C·ha –1 in S150, to 265 t C·ha –1 in S70, to 272 in S110. NEP C values followed ecosystem C stocks, ranging from 1.7, to 2.4, to 5.1 t C·ha –1 ·year –1 for S150, S70, and S110, respectively. Stem C-stock uptake rate in S110 showed an increase in growth rate over the first 110 years of S150. We estimate that this increase in stem C stock was 6.2%. Given the constancy of forest management among the stands of the chronosequence, we hypothesize that the increase in C stock shown by S110 is due to indirect human-induced effects. We conclude that managed young forests can take advantage of increased resources and counteract the C losses at harvest that are seen in the old forests.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 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

Citations46
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicTree-ring climate responsesFrench-language works237,207