MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412884078 · doi:10.1111/gcbb.70069

A Global Short Rotation Coppice (<scp>SRC</scp>) Willow Dataset for the Bioeconomy: Implications for the Yield in the <scp>United Kingdom</scp>

2025· article· en· W4412884078 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Antonio Castellano Albors, A. Shepherd, I. Shield, W. J. Macalpine, Kevin Lindegaard, Ian Tubby, Astley Hastings

Bibliographic record

VenueGCB Bioenergy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBioenergy crop production and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUK Energy Research CentreUK Research and Innovation
KeywordsShort rotation coppiceWillowCoppicingYield (engineering)Short rotation forestryBioenergyChemistryAgroforestryBiotechnologyBiofuelEnvironmental scienceBotanyBiologyWoody plantPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Short rotation coppice (SRC) willow is a second‐generation lignocellulosic energy crop with a background of research and breeding programmes carried out globally for more than three decades. While commercial standards include planting in mixtures of 6–8 willow genotypes of genetic diversity, much research to date has focused on monoculture trials. Research has found significant differences in willow performance through different management methods, soil properties and environmental interactions (GxE), when applied locally. However, global analysis of these interactions remains a challenge. We present a global SRC willow dataset to facilitate researchers and growers with a resource not available to date to help in closing the gap between research and industry. Data has been collected through literature review and personal communications with key researchers on willow in the United Kingdom. Global annual average yield is 9 Mg Dry Matter (DM) ha−1 year−1 with 17 genotypes, including two types of mixtures, above the economic threshold of 10 Mg DM ha−1 year−1. Canada and the United States are the best and worst performers with 10.6 and 6.7 Mg DM hr−1 year−1, respectively. We expect this dataset to provide an efficient way of estimating yields at a smaller scale by multiple combinations of GxE interactions. Biomass production from 1‐year‐old stems in the first harvest cycle is significantly lower than for the second and third year of the first harvest cycle (ANOVA, p < 0.001). Harvest cycles of 2 and 3 years did show significant but small differences in final yield (t = 3.87, p < 0.001). A random forest statistical procedure was applied to test for the association of the predictor variables with biomass production. The model explained up to 63.65% of the variance observed in yield for all genotypes and sites, with genetic diversity among the most important 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.192

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.004

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGCB BioenergySame topicBioenergy crop production and managementFrench-language works237,207