MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2765522154 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2017-0323

Site and tree factors determining the distribution of <i>Phellinus tremulae</i> in <i>Populus tremuloides</i> in Utah, USA

2017· article· en· W2765522154 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Roger T. Koide, John Watkins, Kevin Ricks, Emily Aranda, Rachel Nettles, Hannah Elizabeth Yokum, Na Yin, Eliza I. Clark

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIncidence (geometry)ForestryLogistic regressionBiologyRegression analysisEcologyGeographyStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Populus tremuloides Michx. is an iconic tree of the mountains of the western United States. In Utah, it very commonly suffers from white trunk rot caused by Phellinus tremulae (Bondartsev) Bondartsev & P.N.Borisov. The incidence of this disease is affected by tree and site characteristics, but the magnitude of these effects appears to be site-dependent. To minimize harvest wood loss in Utah, we determined the locally important factors that explain the wide variation in the incidence of sporocarps of Phellinus tremulae. To avoid confounding of factors, we utilized a multiple regression approach. We found that while the incidence of Phellinus tremulae sporocarps on quaking aspen was always low at high elevations, it was variable at low elevations. Our logistic regression model indicated that variation in the incidence of sporocarps at low elevations was attributable, in part, to variation in aspect, slope, environmental stress, and tree age and size. Based on these results, we recommend that harvesting at elevations below 2500 m be confined to younger trees or to sites on relatively steep, north-facing slopes. Because of site-dependency, the same general method could be used to establish harvesting criteria in other regions.

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)0.001
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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest Research→Same topicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies→French-language works237,207→