MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4387124581 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2023-0153

Genotype and environment interaction on the wood quality of <i>Eucalyptus</i> spp. for energy purposes

2023· article· en· W4387124581 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Thammi Queuri Gomes da Cunha, Pedro Augusto Fonseca Lima, Alyne Chaveiro Santos, Evandro Novaes, Carlos Roberto Sette-Junior

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Goiás
KeywordsEucalyptusEdaphicBiologyGene–environment interactionSowingEnvironmental scienceWood productionSoil waterBotanyHorticultureForestryGenotypeForest managementEcologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to evaluate the wood chemical and energetic characteristics of Eucalyptus spp. clones planted in three sites in the Midwest of Brazil. Thus, five clones from Eucalyptus spp. were planted in different sites aiming to determine the qualitative characteristics of the wood resulting from the variation in the tree growth environment and the genetic material. The same clones were planted in the three sites to determine the genotype × environment interaction. The trees were then sampled at 5 years after planting for their physical–chemical and energetic characterization. The results showed that the wood characteristics vary in different proportions according to the clone, just as the growth environment of the trees alters the behavior of the clones for the same characteristics. The edaphic variables affected the wood characteristics, inferring that the water content in the soil has more effect on the wood properties than the water content in the air, mainly on wood basic density. The results of this study indicate that using the appropriate genotype related to the environment conditions determines the wood characteristics, since the wood properties are strongly influenced by the edaphoclimatic variables.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.320
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest Research→Same topicForest ecology and management→French-language works237,207→