Genetic Variation in Height Growth among Populations of Eastern White Pine (Pinus strobus L.) in Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Provenances of eastern white pine (Pinus strobus L.) were sampled from natural populations in Ontario and assessed in a 2-year greenhouse study followed by two 5-year short term field tests to reveal the scale and patterns of genetic variation in growth and adaptation at early ages. Results indicate that considerable genetic variation in growth potential exists among white pine populations in Ontario and that appreciable genetic gain can be realized through seed source selection in reforestation programs. Strong age-age correlation between growth traits at different years and the weak genotype-by-provenance interaction suggested high efficiency in provenance selection at early stage. Due to the latitude predominated clinal pattern of geographic variation and the significant reduction in growth potential when seeds are transferred from north to south, it is recommended not to use seed sources 1.5 to 2.0 degrees (latitude) north of a place where regeneration of eastern white pine occurs. Because of the relatively mild test environments at two sites and the short-term nature of this study, further research is required to investigate differences in cold hardiness among provenances before safe south to north seed transfer distances can be determined.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".