MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378229258 · doi:10.3390/f14061091

Thinning Increases Individual Tree Growth While Reducing the Growth Heterogeneity of Lodgepole Pine

2023· article· en· W4378229258 on OpenAlexafffund
Mostarin Ara, Bradley D. Pinno, Francis Scaria, Robert E. Froese

Bibliographic record

VenueForests · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersForest Resource Improvement Association of Alberta
KeywordsThinningPinus contortaStand developmentTree (set theory)Growth modelBiologyMathematicsBotanyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The positive effect of thinning on individual tree growth is well known, but the subsequent growth dynamics of individual trees over a rotation is relatively unknown, even though this is critical for interpreting actual thinning effects. Therefore, in this study, we aimed to investigate the thinning response of individual tree growth dynamics of lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta var. latifolia) over rotation using an individual tree growth model. We used data from an operational site to use as input to the Mixedwood Growth Model, an individual tree growth model, to simulate tree growth throughout the rotation. Overall, we found that thinning increased the absolute growth of individual trees and reduced the growth heterogeneity throughout the rotation. Combining pre-commercial thinning prior to commercial thinning provided maximum growth and less growth variability in individual trees. The positive effect of thinning was immediate and declined with time since thinning with most of the responses occurred within the first 10–15 years of thinning.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.487

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 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

Citations18
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueForestsSame topicForest ecology and managementFrench-language works237,207