Inheritance of density, microfibril angle, and modulus of elasticity in juvenile wood of<i>Pinus radiata</i>at two locations in Australia
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A total of 1640 increment cores from 343 radiata pine ( Pinus radiata D. Don) families were sampled at two second-generation progeny trials, aged 6 and 7 years, for a detailed genetic study of juvenile wood quality traits. Density, microfibril angle (MFA), and modulus of elasticity (MOE) were determined from pith to bark using SilviScan ® technology. Heritability was greatest for area-weighted density at the two sites (0.63 and 0.77, respectively), and the lowest for growth traits (<0.23). Genotype by environment interaction was low for all three wood quality traits. A positive genetic correlation between density and MOE (0.43), and a highly negative, and therefore, favourable genetic correlation between MFA and MOE (–0.92) were observed, implying that improvement of multiple juvenile wood properties is possible. The genetic correlations between whole-core wood quality traits and individual-ring measurements suggest that improvement for juvenile wood properties across the entire profile of the corewood including the innermost rings can be achieved. However, density, MFA, and MOE had unfavourable genetic correlations with diameter growth suggesting that selection for increased density and MOE, and reduced MFA in the absence of selection for growth will result in a genetic loss for growth rate.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 it