Biomass allocation and growth of young black spruce (<i>Picea mariana</i> (Mill.) B.S.P.) trees
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurately predicting biomass allocation to below- versus above-ground tree parts is crucial in estimating carbon stocks in forest ecosystems. A 9-year outdoor experiment was conducted to analyze the variations in biomass allocation in below- and above-ground parts in black spruce trees growing at the edge or at the center of a raised garden bed. Dry biomass, length, and radial growth of stems, branches, and roots were measured as well as the annual above-ground growth for the five most recent years prior to harvesting. We found that more than 90% of dry biomass was allocated to the above-ground tree parts whereas less than 10% was allocated to the root system. Strong correlations were found between the different tree parts regardless of the tree’s position in the delimited growth area. Annual growth variables declined from 2018 to 2022, likely due to increased competition for resources. The dry biomass of the woody root and the root surface close to the stem were well correlated to the above-ground tree parts (varying between 45% and 95%). Thus, the strong link between the root system and the above tree parts is confirmed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".