Do understory saplings respond to both light and below-ground competitio?: a field experiment in a north-eastern American hardwood forest and a literature review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A study was initiated in 1993 to evaluate the potential effects of both above- and below-ground competition exclusion on yellow birch (Betula alleghaniensis Britton), sugar maple (Acer saccharum Marsh.) and American beech (Fagus grandifolia Ehrh.) sapling growth along an understory light gradient ranging from 3% to 50% of full sunlight. We compared four different growth variables between a control and a treatment (trenching and manual removal of nearby vegetation). Height growth, diameter growth, height over stem diameter ratio, and crown area varied with light availability in all three species, whereas trenching treatment had no significant effect. Our results show that light is the main factor affecting understory sapling growth following a selection cut in this northern hardwood forest, at least up to 50% full sunlight. The unresponsiveness of these three species to below-ground competition is discussed in relation to a literature review in which both soil richness and species functional ecology are considered.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".