Response of interior spruce to fertilization in the interior of British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1987, a research project, conducted in the interior of British Columbia, was undertaken in order to obtain preliminary fertilization response data for three interior species. In 1988, as part of this contract, 12 screening trials were established in young interior spruce stands in the north-central interior of B. C. using factorial combinations of nitrogen and "complete" mix fertilizer. Initial assessment of the unfertilized foliage obtained from the 12 installations indicated that all stands exibited low nitrogen and potentially low sulphur levels. After fertilization, the effects of the treatments were measured by needle weight response, nutrient concentration, and subsequent nutrient content response. In all 12 installations the largest needle weight response occured when the nitrogen and the "complete" mix fertilizers were combined.. In the treatments where nitrogen was applied alone, no significant change in needle size was recorded. Nutritionally, nitrogen fertilization resulted in large increases in nitrogen concentration, indicating this element was limiting. As well, nitrogen fertilization also produced large decreases in K, S, and S04-S concentrations. Nitrogen-only fertilization also caused large elevations in the N/S ratios to occur. This elevation in N/S ratios and the subsequent decreases in S and S04-S concentrations seem to indicate that nitrogen-only fertilization has a negative impact on the sulphur nutrition of interior spruce. The addition of the "complete" mix fertilizer was, in most cases, successful in returning the decreased nutrient concentration levels of K, S, and S04 and the elevated N/S ratios back to their original unfertilized status. From these results it appears that nitrogen fertilization of interior spruce should only be considered if it is accompanied by a mixture of other nutrients; the most important component being sulphur.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".