Climate-based allometric biomass equations for five major Canadian timber species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate estimation of forest biomass is essential to quantify the role forests play in balancing terrestrial carbon. Allometric equations based on tree size have been used for this purpose worldwide. There is little quantitative understanding on how environmental variation may affect tree allometries. Even less known is how to incorporate environmental factors into such equations to improve estimation. Here we tested the effects of climate on tree allometric equations and proposed to model forest biomass by explicitly incorporating climatic factors. For the five major Canadian timber species tested, the incorporation of climate was not found to improve the allometric models. For trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx.) and tamarack (Larix laricina (Du Roi) K.Koch), the residuals of their conventional allometric models were found strongly related to frost-free period and mean annual temperature, respectively. The predictions of the two best climate-based models were significantly improved, which indicates that trembling aspen and tamarack store more aboveground biomass when growing in warmer than in colder regions. We showed that, under the RCP4.5 modest climate change scenario, there would be a 10% underestimation of aboveground biomass for these two species if the conventional non-climate models would still be in use in 2030. This study suggests the necessity to proactively develop climate-based allometric equations for more accurate and reliable forest biomass estimation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".