MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4243211013 · doi:10.1139/x99-200

Epicormic sprouting of pruned western larch

2000· article· en· W4243211013 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kevin L. O’Hara, Narayanan I. Valappil

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLarchPruningSproutingCrown (dentistry)BiologyHorticultureBotanyDiameter at breast heightMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Western larch (Larix occidentalis Nutt.) trees in western Montana, U.S.A., were monitored for 6 years following pruning to assess incidence of epicormic sprouting. Trees were pruned to either 2.4 or 5.5 m. Epicormic sprouts were more prevalent in smaller diameter trees and in trees pruned to shorter live crown lengths than larger or longer crowned trees. Number of sprouts declined since pruning, but over 30% of trees still had epicormic sprouts 6 years after pruning. Sprouts that did not extend from the bole were prone to becoming dormant or dying over time. Extended sprouts were more persistent and will probably form wood-quality defects that remain outside the defect core. Pruning of western larch may still be successful for enhancing clearwood production if trees are pruned to retain at least a 50% live crown ratio and if pruning is delayed until trees reach about 16 cm diameter at breast height for a short pruning lift (2.4 m) or 22 cm for a higher pruning lift (5.5 m).

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 score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.265 · 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
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicForest ecology and managementFrench-language works237,207