MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162400456 · doi:10.1139/x07-122

Boreal forest provenance tests used to predict optimal growth and response to climate change. 1. Jack pine

2008· article· en· W2162400456 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Ashley M. Thomson, William H. Parker

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsClimate changeTaigaLatitudeEnvironmental scienceBorealPrecipitationLimitingPopulationPhysical geographyAtmospheric sciencesClimatologyEcologyGeographyForestryMeteorologyBiologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Height, diameter, and survival data were obtained from 16 rangewide jack pine provenance trials in eastern Canada and the United States. Climate data for each seed source and test location were used to relate height growth to 72 climate variables. Population response functions based on August minimum and January maximum temperatures were developed to predict climate values maximizing height growth for individual seed sources. Site transfer functions based on March precipitation and December minimum temperature were developed to predict climate values maximizing height growth for test locations. Contour lines representing optimal performance were fitted to current (1971–2000) and future (2041–2070) climate grids. Optimal growth is currently achieved between 46°N and 47°N latitude for most seed sources. Future temperature increases are expected to cause a northward shift of the optimal habitat by approximately 2°. Northern sources are growing at temperatures below optimum and would benefit from warmer environments provided other environmental factors do not become limiting. Central sources are growing at close to optimum and will be negatively affected by increased temperatures in the future. Southern sources performed better in cooler environments, and warmer temperatures may cause significant height growth loss and the potential extirpation of these populations.

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)0.002
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 score0.302
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations78
Published2008
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicForest ecology and managementFrench-language works237,207