MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4237133633 · doi:10.1139/x00-119

Structure and developmental process of a<i>Quercus mongolica</i>var.<i>grosseserrata</i>forest in the<i>Fagetea crenatae</i>region in Japan

2000· article· en· W4237133633 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kazumi Fujita, Junji Sano

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicHorticultural and Viticultural Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFujiwara Natural History FoundationPennsylvania State University
KeywordsSeedlingCuttingDominance (genetics)BotanyFagaceaeHorticultureBiologyForestryGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Structure and developmental processes were studied in a Quercus mongolica Fisch. var. grosseserrata (Bl.) Rehd. et Wils. forest in the Fagetea crenatae Bl. region in Japan. The Quercus forest was classified into three stand types: stands dominated by Quercus with many species (type Q-MIX), Quercus-Fagus (type Q-F), and Quercus (type Q). In Q-MIX, Alnus hirsuta Turcz. had a bell-shaped DBH-class distribution. Most Quercus trees were single stemmed. The establishment of Quercus trees occurred continuously from the 1900s. The percentage of growth change (%GC) exhibited negative values from the 1940s. In Q-F and Q, Quercus trees had bell-shaped DBH-class distributions, and multiple-stemmed trees showed broad distributions. In Q-F, tree establishment peak was in the 1870s. %GC exhibited large fluctuations. In Q, tree establishment peak was in the 1850s. %GC exhibited negative values for 60 years. In conclusion, type Q-MIX, Q-F, and Q developed mainly by seedling regeneration following major cutting in the 1900s, sprout and seedling regeneration following intermittent cuttings mainly in the 1870s, and sprout and seedling regeneration following successive cuttings mainly in the 1850s, respectively. Cutting disturbance can be a major factor in developmental processes in Quercus forest; the frequency and intensity of cuttings affect the stand structure and the dominance of Quercus in the Fagetea crenatae region.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations4
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest Research→Same topicHorticultural and Viticultural Research→French-language works237,207→