Performance and physiology of large containerized and bare-root spruce seedlings in relation to scarification and competition in Québec (Canada)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
- In Québec (Canada), the use of large planting stock is being applied in combination with scarification, since herbicide use is forbidden in public forest. Large containerized and bare-root stock of black spruce were planted on two sites located within the sub-boreal mixedwood region of eastern Québec. We analyzed data to detect main effects and interactions among scarification, competing vegetation and stock type on seedling growth and physiology during the first three growing seasons. Scarification did not improve seedling water relations, third-year height and ground-level diameter, and foliar nutrient concentration. After three years, the two stock types showed similar water relations and nutritional status but the large containerized seedlings performed slightly better than the large bare-root stock in terms of diameter and height growth. Competing vegetation greatly reduced seedling diameter, foliar-N concentration, compared to competition-free seedlings. We discuss results in relation with treatment effects on above- and belowground resource availability to newly planted conifers.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 teacher head, 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".