MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157848770 · doi:10.1139/x05-308

Tree seedling growth and survival over 6 years across different microsites in a temperate rain forest

2006· article· en· W2157848770 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Peter J. Bellingham, Sarah J. Richardson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeedlingPodocarpusBiologyCloud forestTemperate rainforestBotanyCanopyTemperate forestFernTemperate climateEcologyEcosystemMontane ecology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigated whether canopy tree seedlings have different growth and mortality rates on different microsites in montane rain forests of the western South Island, New Zealand. Seedling relative height growth rates of three species, Podocarpus hallii, Quintinia acutifolia, and Weinmannia racemosa, were very low (mean = 0.037 cm·cm –1 ·year –1 ). Seedling growth rates were higher on logs than on the ground at high light levels, but the probability of seedling death on logs was also greater at high light levels. Seedling foliar N and P concentrations were generally not different between logs and the ground. Growth rates and foliar N concentrations of Quintinia and Weinmannia were greater for seedlings on tree fern trunks than for seedlings on the ground. Mortality rates did not differ between seedlings on tree fern trunks and seedlings on the ground. Seedling densities of Quintinia and Weinmannia were greater on logs and tree ferns than on the ground. Podocarpus densities were not different between logs and the ground, and this species did not occur on tree ferns. Quintinia and Weinmannia benefit from establishment on elevated microsites but this is not clearly the case for Podocarpus. Tree regeneration niches for such slow-growing species can only be determined through long-term studies.

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)0.000
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 score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations64
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207