MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999092495 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2019-0319

The interactive effect of competition and climate on growth of boreal tree species in western Canada and Alaska

2020· article· en· W2999092495 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Felix O. Oboite, Philip G. Comeau

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicTree-ring climate responses
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersMitacsAlberta-Pacific Forest IndustriesGovernment of Alberta
KeywordsPinus contortaInterspecific competitionIntraspecific competitionBasal areaCompetition (biology)Black spruceBorealTaigaAbies balsameaEcologyClimate changeBiologyDeciduousEcological successionBalsamBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding interactions between competition and climate in relation to their effects on individual tree growth is crucial to the development of climate-sensitive growth models required for modelling boreal forest succession in a changing climate. We used data from permanent growth and yield sample plots in western Canada and Alaska to investigate the impact of competition within a regional gradient of climatic conditions for lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta Douglas ex Loudon), jack pine (Pinus banksiana Lamb.), trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx.), balsam poplar (Populus balsamifera L.), white spruce (Picea glauca (Moench) Voss), and black spruce (Picea mariana (Mill.) Britton, Sterns & Poggenb.). We characterized the effects of competition (basal area of spruce–fir, deciduous, and pine trees larger than the focal tree) and climate (mean annual temperature and precipitation) and their interactions on basal area growth of individual trees using linear mixed-effects models. Our results indicated that intraspecific competition had stronger effects on growth than interspecific competition and climate. Moreover, significant interactions between intraspecific competition and climate suggest that an increase in intraspecific competition will lead to a reduction in tree growth for warmer regions (lodgepole pine, trembling aspen, balsam poplar, and white spruce) and wetter regions (jack pine). The manner in which interspecific competition altered tree growth responses to climate was variable, depending on tree species and competition type. These results indicate that the relationships between growth and climate may differ according to the degree of competition and the structure of the stand.

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)0.001
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 score0.263
Threshold uncertainty score0.266

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations34
Published2020
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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