Twenty-Year Response of Ponderosa Pine (Pinus ponderosa Laws.) to Treatment with Hexazinone in Northeastern Oregon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Chemical control of competing vegetation with hexazinone is a common and effective silvicultural treatment for ensuring ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa Laws.) plantation success on dry sites in the western United States, yet few studies document the effect for more than the first few years after planting. This study, re-evaluated 20 years after planting, followed ponderosa pine growth and survival when hexazinone was applied in broadcast and spot treatments for control of competing vegetation. We continued work from the first 5 years after establishment that identified early differences in ponderosa pine seedling survival and growth with treatment. Examination of 20-year trends indicated that individual tree volume and volume per hectare continued to diverge among treatments. The economic differences among treatments may increase as more surviving, faster-growing trees in the broadcast treatments reach higher-value products sooner. Initial control of competing vegetation increased the likelihood of seedling survival and increased tree size after 20 years. Results pertained to ponderosa pine of the Douglas-fir/spiraea (Pseudotsuga menziesii var. glauca Beissn./Spiraea betulifolia Pall.) and Douglas-fir/common snowberry (Pseudotsuga menziesii var. glauca Beissn./Symphoricarpos albus [L.] S. F. Blake) plant associations in northeastern Oregon, but they should apply to similar sites throughout much of the intermountain West.
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) | 0.001 | 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".