An analysis of the growth of young stands of western red cedar and associated species on the University of British Columbia research forest, Haney, British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Breast height radial growth of 165 western red cedar (Thuja plicata Donn), 14.5 western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla (Raf.) Sarg.) and 33 Douglas fir trees (Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco), in young natural stands on the eastern side of the University of British Columbia Research Forest near Haney, B.C. was analysed. Individual tree parameters measured included breast height diameter, total height, age at breast height, radial growth over last five and ten years, crown width, live crown length, tree class, live crown ratio, height/age ratio, crown width/breast height diameter ratio, and height/ crown width. Stand parameters measured were number of trees per plot, average breast height diameter of plot, and basal area per acre of plot. Plots were of variable radius as determined in prism cruising. Growth was investigated from results of simple correlation coefficients and several multiple regression analyses computed on an IBM 7040. Causes of variation in growth were assessed by studying interaction of variables affecting growth patterns. Individual species have distinctly different modes of growth. Species react differently to changes in stand density. Radial growth can be determined from measurements of tree crowns; and crown development reflects changes in stand density. Difference between species are found as crown development varies with stand density changes. Crown dimensions of western hemlock are least sensitive to changes in stand density as measured by basal area per acre, crown width/breast height diameter, live crown ratio, or height/crown width. An understanding of how crown dimensions change with variation in stand density can be used to refine predictions of tree radial growth derived from crown measurements.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".