Wood density of Norway spruce in uneven-aged stands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study focused on wood density and annual ring width in Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) grown in uneven-aged stands (UAS). In total, 96 trees were harvested from five UAS that had been managed by single-tree selection for decades. A data set of 27 trees from even-aged stands (EAS) was used for comparison. In the UAS trees, high density and narrow annual rings were found in the juvenile wood near the pith. Thereafter, wood density rapidly decreased until the 20th annual ring, followed by an increase toward the bark. In the outermost rings, wood density again slightly decreased. The trends in wood density in the UAS trees correspond with those reported for naturally regenerated, even-aged Norway spruce stands, with the exception of the decrease in the outermost rings. A mixed linear model with ring width, cambial age, and canopy position as fixed parameters accounted for 53% of the variation in wood density of the UAS trees. In contrast to UAS trees, EAS trees showed increased wood density in the outer rings as a result of decreasing growth rate. The abrupt change in wood density of UAS trees may affect the properties of timber sawn close to the pith.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".