MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2545880365 · doi:10.5558/tfc2016-062

Effects of sand burial and overstory tree age on seedling establishment in coastal Pinus thunbergii forests in the northern Shandong Peninsula, China

2016· article· en· W2545880365 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Peili Mao, Hongxiang Mu, Banghua Cao, Yuhong Liu, Zhaofei Fan, Shumei Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSeedling growth and survival studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of GeorgiaAuburn University
KeywordsSeedlingPinus thunbergiiGerminationNatural regenerationPeninsulaChinaShoreRegeneration (biology)Shandong peninsulaBiologyEnvironmental scienceForestryGeographyAgronomyEcologyPhysical geography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Coastal Pinus thunbergii (Japanese black pine) forests in the northern Shandong Peninsula of China recently experienced widespread natural regeneration failure. This study identifies critical factors that affect natural regeneration of P. thunbergii. Seeds from trees of various ages (13–32 years) were used to investigate the effects of age and burial depth in sand on germination and seedling establishment. Results show that seed density in 2–5 cm soil decreased with increased distance from the shoreline. Sand burial decreased seed germination but did not affect the relative growth rate of seedlings at depths from 0.5 to 3 cm. Germination, leaf mass ratio, and relative growth rates were higher with seedlings originating from older trees, all of which enhanced seedling resistance to sand burial. Tree age and seed burial were found to be determining factors for natural regeneration of the coastal P. thunbergii forest. Silvicultural treatments that promote quality of seed sources and mitigation of sand burial can be used in the future to improve the regeneration of these coastal forests.

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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicSeedling growth and survival studiesFrench-language works237,207