MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387408348 · doi:10.15376/biores.18.4.boakye

Systematic review: Climate and non-climate factors influencing wood density in the boreal zone

2023· article· en· W4387408348 on OpenAlexaff
Emmanuel Amoah Boakye, Cyriac S. Mvolo

Bibliographic record

VenueBioResources · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest ServiceUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimate changeTaigaBorealEnvironmental scienceSilvicultureAgroforestryFire regimeForest managementEcosystemEnvironmental resource managementEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wood density is a crucial factor in determining the quality of wood in boreal ecosystems within the Northern Hemisphere. Climate variables play a significant role in shaping wood density, posing challenges for forest managers and stakeholders in the wood industry to adapt amidst climate change. However, our current understanding of these effects remains incomplete. This systematic literature review explores the multifaceted influences on wood density in the boreal zone, encompassing both climate-related and non-climatic factors. The findings demonstrate that warmer temperatures can cause both increases and decreases in wood density, primarily due to their impact on tracheid lignification and cell wall thickening. Nonetheless, the outcome depends on various factors, including species type, age, soil conditions, presence of pests and diseases, fire, windstorms, and silviculture practices. The quantification of complex relationships between these factors and wood density has been insufficient in existing literature. Understanding the impacts of both climate and non-climate factors on wood density is essential for fostering a sustainable wood industry, while effectively mitigating adverse effects and maximizing benefits. Forest managers can leverage this knowledge to optimize wood production strategies, ensuring long-term ecological resilience amidst the increasingly variable climate challenges.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.370

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioResourcesSame topicForest Ecology and Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207