Radial variation of wood anatomical and chemical properties in eight poplar clones
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wood properties are crucial for the development and application of poplar clones. Here, the effects of clone and age on anatomical and chemical properties were analyzed in eight poplar clones (50, Zhonglin46, 108, 36, N179, Danhong, Sangju, and Nanyang) from Henan province, China. The results show that the effects of clone and age are both significant for these wood properties. The eight clones were grouped into three clusters according to their annual ring width, fiber quality, and chemical properties. For some properties, including annual ring width, fiber length, and microfibril angle, all clones displayed the same radial variation trends; however, for other properties, such as holocellulose content, the radial variation trends were different depending on the clones. The culmination of the mean annual increment corresponded to the turning ages of wood properties such as annual ring width in the eight clones, and holocellulose content in the partial clones except for fiber length, microfibril angle, and vessel length. The recommended rotation age of these poplar clones is 8–9 years based on the fiber quality and chemical components. These results indicate strong genetic and age control of the wood properties and highlight the rich source of variation for poplar clone selection.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it