MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390732374 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2023-0213

Tree and stand characteristics associated with the occurrence of false heartwood in individual Japanese white birch trees

2024· article· en· W4390732374 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Akira Nakaya, H. Osaki, Yasuyuki Ohno, Toshiya Yoshida

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceHokkaido University
KeywordsBetula platyphyllaBasal areaCunninghamiaCrown (dentistry)ThinningBetulaceaeBotanyHorticultureBiologyForestryMathematicsEcologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

New wood uses of Japanese white birch ( Betula platyphylla var. japonica) have attracted much attention in recent years, but false heartwood has led to a decline in commercial value due to its irregular wood color. In this study, we assessed the occurrence of false heartwood and its proportion to stem cross-sectional area (PFH) in individual Japanese white birch (482 trees) in a ca. 70-year-old natural secondary forest. Specifically, we investigated the relative strength of the direct/indirect effects of individual size (BA), growth rate (GR), crown ratio (CR), number of branch scars (NBS), basal area sum of neighboring trees (BAS) and topographic wetness index (TWI) on PFH. In total, 80.3% of trees had false heartwood. CR was found to be the most important factor, acting through direct and indirect negative effects. BA and NBS had a positive effect, and TWI had a negative effect on PFH. BA had a positive correlation with tree age, indicating that PFH can be reduced in trees with faster growth. Simultaneously, BAS had an indirect positive effect on PFH. These results suggested that thinning, which reduces BAS and increases CR, can reduce false heartwood.

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 score0.991
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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