MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2312856864 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2012-0308

Genetic relationships between wood quality traits and diameter growth of juvenile core wood in Sitka spruce

2013· article· en· W2312856864 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Stuart Kennedy, Andrew D. S. Cameron, S.J. Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWood Treatment and Properties
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJuvenileDiameter at breast heightBiologyHorticultureBotanyYoung's modulusAnimal scienceMathematicsMaterials scienceEcologyComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The trend towards shorter rotations in planted conifer stands has resulted in a reduction in the proportion of mature wood relative to juvenile core wood, raising concerns that the mechanical performance of sawn battens will be affected. The potential to improve the wood quality of the juvenile core of Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis (Bong.) Carrière) without compromising growth rate was investigated. Rapid and inexpensive indirect methods of assessing wood properties on standing trees using a Pilodyn gun and acoustic velocity were compared with direct measurements made on wood samples cut from the juvenile core. Strong genetic correlations were observed between Pilodyn gun values and direct measures of density (–0.76) and between the square of acoustic velocity and modulus of elasticity (0.73). The genetic correlation between the square of acoustic velocity and microfibril angle was also strong (–0.84). These results suggest that indirect assessments of wood properties within juvenile core wood are sufficiently reliable for these techniques to be used in the Sitka spruce breeding programme. Although a strong negative genetic correlation between diameter at breast height and density was noted (–0.79), sufficient variation exists within the breeding population to select families with both good growth rate and high modulus of elasticity wood.

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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.173 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicWood Treatment and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207