MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225311199 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2021-0338

Radial patterns of specific gravity variation in North American conifers

2022· article· en· W4225311199 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Laurence R. Schimleck, Joseph Dahlen, David Auty

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTree Root and Stability Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPithPinus contortaPinaceaeBotanyThujaSubspeciesPinus <genus>Bark (sound)BiologyForestryGeographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An extensive summary of publications reporting radial specific gravity (SG) variation for North American conifers is presented. SG varies from pith to bark in three distinct patterns before reaching asymptomatic values: Type 1 (SG increases with cambial age), Type 2 (SG is initially high at the pith, then decreases with cambial age, before increasing), and Type 3 (SG decreases with cambial age). Pinaceae have either a Type 1 or 2 pattern (majority are Type 2). Cupressaceae have a Type 3 pattern, but radial SG data do not exist for some species. We reviewed publications in table 7-1 of Panshin and de Zeeuw (the 1970 edition) which reports SG variation by species and Type (the 1980 edition has an equivalent table but does not reference publications), examining sampling strategies and radial patterns. For a small number of species, Type was either incorrectly interpreted or sampling made a conclusion regarding pattern of radial variation impossible. Specific examples of mislabeled Types reported by Panshin and de Zeeuw for Douglas-fir ( Pseudotsuga menziesii), lodgepole pine ( Pinus contorta), red pine ( Pinus resinosa) and shortleaf pine ( Pinus echinata), and western redcedar ( Thuja plicata) are described. We conclude for nearly all species the pattern of radial SG variation is consistent; however, different patterns have been reported for eastern white pine ( Pinus strobus) and subspecies of Douglas-fir and ponderosa pine ( Pinus ponderosa).

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)0.001
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 score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.008
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations14
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicTree Root and Stability StudiesFrench-language works237,207