Comparative Anatomy of Branches, Roots and Wood of Some North American Dicotyledonous and Coniferous Trees and Woody Shrubs Used in Ethnographic Artifacts : Identification and Conservation Concerns
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This book deals with the comparative anatomy of the tissues of the bark, phloem, heartwood, sapwood, and pith in wood, branches, and roots of woody shrubs, hardwood trees and softwood coniferous trees, that were reported to have been used historically in making ethnographic and archaeological artifacts. The species researched in this book are endemic to Northwest Coast of North America. These species have generic anatomical characteristics that are also common in other genera of the same family. Thus, the information is applicable to tree genera in similar latitudinal environments in Canada, USA, Europe and Asia. The goal of the information is to assist; curators with their research and conservators with their care of artifacts made of these plant parts. Identification of a species is usually a curator’s job and is used to determine provenience. Conservators may obtain the species/genus identification by research or provenience. Relevant morphological, anatomical, and chemical features of plant parts are needed to interpret the physical changes and their influence on the stability of the artifact. Understanding the structure and inherent strengths or weaknesses of the plant part assist conservators in logical care for a specific object. These are presented throughout the text were possible. Also, throughout the text a few examples of the materials from artifacts are presented for comparison. The terminology used in the text is explained as it goes along and there is a glossary for further explanations. The terminology is easy because all plants have the same anatomical types of tissues, but the anatomical patterns of the cells are variable with species. A bibliography is supplied for further information on specific topics. Reviewed by Dr. Nancy Odegaard, Head of Preservation, Arizona State Museum and Professor, Univ. of Arizona School of Anthropology and Conservation; Dr. Robert Blanchette, Professor, Department of Plant Pathology, Univ. of Minnesota. The preparation of this book was made possible through a Samuel H. Kress Conservation Publication Fellowship, administered by the Foundation of the American Institute for Conservation., Washington DC. For which the author is most grateful.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".