MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171982569 · doi:10.1139/x02-172

Responses to mechanical wounding and fire in tree species characteristic of seasonally dry tropical forest of Bolivia

2003· article· en· W2171982569 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tim Schoonenberg, Michelle A. Pinard, Stephen Woodward

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTree Root and Stability Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBark (sound)CambiumBotanyHorticultureBiologyLight intensityEcologyXylem

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Short-term responses to stem wounding were measured over a 60-day period on six tree species found in seasonally dry tropical forest in Bolivia. Three types of wounds were inflicted to simulate mechanical bark damage and bark damage caused by low- and high-intensity fires. Extent of wood discoloration associated with wounding varied with wound type and severity, with high-intensity burns associated with the greatest amount of discoloration, low-intensity burns the least, and mechanical wounds intermediate. Two thin-barked species produced a distinct ligno suberised boundary zone in the bark earlier than thicker barked species; however, all species produced a distinct wound periderm by 60 days postwounding. The amount of wood discoloration associated with wounding appeared to be independent of the thickness of the lignosuberized boundary zone. Bark thickness provided a useful measure of species' resistance to wood discoloration with low-intensity burns but not with high-intensity burns where bark occasionally separated from the cambium or developed cracks and fissures. Variability in short-term responses to wounding and other factors may result in differences in the composition and abundance of microorganisms that colonize the wounds, with implications for reductions in wood quality and decay development.

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)0.000
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations30
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicTree Root and Stability StudiesFrench-language works237,207