MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4400640909 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2024-0005

The impact of climate on the dominant height and climate thresholds for <i>P. elliottii, P. taeda, P. patula</i>, and <i>P. patula x P. tecunumanii</i> plantation forests

2024· article· en· W4400640909 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jaco-Pierre van der Merwe, Gerard Eckard Lindner, Yolandi Ernst, Ilaria Germishuizen, E. van Heerden, Hugo Zandberg, Gabigabi Sibiya, Ndamulelo Raboho, Lizette de Waal, Thabani Ndlovu, Leonard Mabaso, Niel Zondach, Nanette Christie, Charlie Clarke, Shawn D. Mansfield

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPinus patulaForestryEnvironmental scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plantation forests were introduced into South Africa to satisfy the regional demand for wood-based products, which are largely found in the Mpumalanga province. To better understand the impacts of climate on the dominant height growth of commercially important plantation species, enumeration data collected from 2012 to 2023 was scrutinised, representing 34740 plots in 2082 plantation compartments. Statistically significant multiple linear regression models were developed to predict dominant heights for Pinus elliottii, Pinus taeda, Pinus patula, and Pinus patula x Pinus tecunumanii hybrids using climate variables as independent factors. Mean annual maximum temperature was statistically significant when modelling dominant height for P. elliottii, while winter maximum temperature was significant for P . taeda, P. patula, and P. patula x P. tecunumanii. Rainfall was found to be significant for P. elliottii and P. taeda, while spring rainfall was found to be more important when modelling dominant height for P. patula. Interestingly, autumn rainfall was found to have a negative impact on dominant height growth of P. taeda and P. patula, while rainfall was not significant in P. patula x P. tecunumanii. The findings imply that the southern pines have water thresholds, while Mexican pines are more temperature limited than water limited.

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)0.001
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 score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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