MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2527821576 · doi:10.5558/tfc2016-060

Species-specific determinants of mortality and recruitment in the forest-steppe ecotone of northeast China

2016· article· en· W2527821576 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Nan Zeng, Huaxia Yao, Mei Zhou, Pengwu Zhao, Jeffery P. Dech, Bo Zhang, Lu Xue

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsNipissing UniversityMinistry of EnvironmentMinistry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsEcotoneSteppeChinaEcologyBiologyForestryGeographyShrub

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tree mortality is a notable phenomenon in the forest-steppe ecotone of China. However, the association between mortality and factors such as a changing climate is uncertain. In the summer of 2014 tree mortality was investigated in 20 × 400 m 2 plots to determine the species-specific determinants of mortality and their influence on subsequent species recruitment. Nine soil physical-chemical properties were examined in addition to slope position, mean DBH and total number of trees. Generalized linear models analyzed relationships between these variables and mortality and recruitment. Mortality was positively associated with increasing average diameter and negatively to high soil pH and total nitrogen content. Recruitment models indicate that Populus davidiana recruitment was positively affected by available phosphorus and mortality, and negatively related to mean DBH. Slope position was the most important contributing variable to Betula platyphylla recruitment. With Quercus mongolica recruitment, soil variables played an important role. These results suggest that tree mortality is affected by soil properties, topography and tree size in China's forest-steppe ecotone, and may improve our understanding of species mortality and contribute to improved forest management.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.581

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicForest ecology and managementFrench-language works237,207