MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2984801094 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2019-0214

Evidence of volcanic activity in the growth rings of trees at the Tacaná volcano, Mexico–Guatemala border

2019· article· en· W2984801094 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Teodoro Carlón-Allende, José Luis Macías, Manuel E. Mendoza, José Villanueva‐Díaz

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicTree-ring climate responses
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science and Technology Council
KeywordsVolcanoChronologyDendrochronologyGeologyVulcanian eruptionTephraGeochemistryPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Volcanic activity can have a significant effect on the growth and survival of trees. The objective of our research was to analyze the effects of the 1855–1856 eruption of the Tacaná volcano and the ashfall from the 1902 eruption of the Santa María volcano, Guatemala, on the radial growth of trees at Tacaná. Dendrochronological sampling was carried out on sites covered by Pinus hartwegii Lindl., and a ring-width chronology was built using 102 increment cores from 75 trees. The ring-width chronology shows two statistically significant suppression events. One of these events occurred from 1857 to 1868 and was potentially caused by the historic eruption of Tacaná (1855–1856). The second suppression event occurred from 1903 to 1908, during which tree growth was affected 1 year after the ashfall caused by the 1902 eruption of Santa María. The growth suppression did not have the same magnitude in all sampled trees and may be related to the thickness of the ash layer deposited around each tree. For the first time, we show that tree growth at Tacaná is reduced by ashfall from volcanic eruptions. Our results may contribute to the evaluation of risks associated with the volcanic activity of the Tacaná volcano.

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 score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.120

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations20
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicTree-ring climate responsesFrench-language works237,207