Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lignin contents of extractive-free wood meals prepared from three adjacent rings of mature wood, sampled at breast height, of amabilis fir, Douglas fir, western red cedar, Sitka spruce, and western hemlock were determined according to the micro-method of Johnson, Moore and Zank. Each of three rings within each species was divided into six positions from earlywood to latewood. Wood meals of 40-80 mesh size were extracted successively with ethyl ether, absolute ethyl alcohol and hot-water, and then solubilized with acetyl bromide and absorbence was calibrated against Klason lignin values. Wood methoxyl content of these same samples had been studied previously. Lignin contents were found to be highly significantly different within positions of growth increments for amabilis fir, Douglas fir, western red cedar and Sitka spruce, but no significant difference was found for western hemlock. Highly significant difference was found between growth rings for western red cedar and similarly significant difference was found for Douglas fir. No significant differences were obtained between growth rings for the other three species, although a slight but definite increase in lignin content with age was observed. Highly significant differences were also found between species and for total averages of each position for the five species. Earlywoods were higher in lignin content than latewood in each species by: Douglas fir, 2.27%; amabilis fir, 2.06%; western red cedar, 1.28%; Sitka spruce, 1.08%; and western hemlock, 0.46%. Lignin contents for individual species were in the order of: western hemlock, 32.85% (32.36-34.04%); western red cedar, 31.23% (29.69-32.68%); amabilis fir, 27.51% (26.17-28.24%); Douglas fir, 26.48% (24.08-28.66%); and Sitka spruce, 25.81% (24.91-26.98%). The correlation coefficient testing association between lignin and wood methoxyl was highly significant for amabilis fir (0.971), Douglas fir (O.913) and western red cedar (0.684). Non-significant correlation occurred with Sitka spruce (0.467) and western hemlock (0.340). The relationship between lignin and wood methoxyl appeared independent of species. The non-lignin methoxyl contents for the five species were estimated and the results showed that these were also independent of species.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".