Effects of 12 years of repeated fertilization on the foliar nutrition and growth of young lodgepole pine in the central interior of British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of different regimes and frequencies of repeated fertilization (applied periodically and yearly) on the foliar nutrition and growth of young lodgepole pine ( Pinus contorta Dougl. ex Loud. var. latifolia Engelm.) were investigated in central British Columbia. After 12 years, tree and stand growth responses indicated modest positive effects of two applications of nitrogen (N) and boron, with relatively large incremental gains to added sulphur and other nutrients (complete). Despite large increases in effective leaf area index and foliar N concentration relative to the control and periodic treatments, yearly applications of fertilizer were relatively ineffective in stimulating growth. When combined with frequent additions of other essential nutrients, annual fertilization with 50–100 kg N/ha over 12 years (825 kg N/ha in total) produced only slightly more “extra” wood than two applications of the multinutrient, complete fertilizer (400 kg N/ha in total) (19.4 m3/ha vs. 17.2 m3/ha, respectively). The most intensive fertilization treatment (1550 kg N/ha plus other nutrients over 12 years) produced shorter trees and less stand volume increment than periodic fertilization with the complete fertilizer. Treatment-induced changes in stand dynamics and growth allocation, disrupted foliar nutrient balance, and changes in soil biota and understory vegetation community structure may have negatively affected tree growth in intensively fertilized treatment plots.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".