MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200442937 · doi:10.3390/rs13234955

Quantifying Crown Morphology of Mixed Pine-Oak Forests Using Terrestrial Laser Scanning

2021· article· en· W4200442937 on OpenAlexaff
Sara Uzquiano, Ignacio Barbeito, Roberto San Martín, Martin Ehbrecht, Dominik Seidel, Felipe Bravo

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersEuropean Regional Development FundHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeJunta de Castilla y LeónUniversidad de Valladolid
KeywordsCrown (dentistry)Scots pineQuercus petraeaCanopyForestryEcologyBiologyEnvironmental scienceSnagBotanyPinus <genus>GeographyHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mixed forests make up the majority of natural forests, and they are conducive to improving the resilience and resistance of forest ecosystems. Moreover, it is in the crown of the trees where the effect of inter- and intra-specific interaction between them is evident. However, our knowledge of changes in crown morphology caused by density, competition, and mixture of specific species is still limited. Here, we provide insight on stand structural complexity based on the study of four response crown variables (Maximum Crown Width Height, MCWH; Crown Base Height, CBH; Crown Volume, CV; and Crown Projection Area, CPA) derived from multiple terrestrial laser scans. Data were obtained from six permanent plots in Northern Spain comprising of two widespread species across Europe; Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) and sessile oak (Quercus petraea (Matt.) Liebl.). A total of 193 pines and 256 oaks were extracted from the point cloud. Correlation test were conducted (ρ ≥ 0.9) and finally eleven independent variables for each target tree were calculated and categorized into size, density, competition and mixture, which was included as a continuous variable. Linear and non-linear multiple regressions were used to fit models to the four crown variables and the best models were selected according to the lowest AIC Index and biological sense. Our results provide evidence for species plasticity to diverse neighborhoods and show complementarity between pines and oaks in mixtures, where pines have higher MCWH and CBH than oaks but lower CV and CPA, contrary to oaks. The species complementarity in crown variables confirm that mixtures can be used to increase above ground structural diversity.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.528
Threshold uncertainty score0.592

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.277
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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations21
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicForest ecology and managementFrench-language works237,207