Soil-site relations for jack pine (Pinus banksiana Lamb.) in Northeastern Ontario
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Site index of jack pine {Pinus banksiana Lamb) measured on 76 plots in \nnortheastern Ontario was related to features of soil and topography using \nmultiple regression. Site index at breast height age 50 years (SIBHSO) was used \nas the dependent variable, and 119 soil and topographic values were used as \nindependent variables. Regression equations were imprecise using all 76 plots. \nWhen separate equations were computed for bedrock-moraine, glaciofluvial, and \nmoraine landforms, precision was much greater with R2 values of 0.78, 0.51 and \n0.60, respectively. \nThe final bedrock-moraine equation consisted of slope percent, thickness \nof the B horizon, and percent stones in the top 25 cm of the soil profile. The \nglaciofluvial equation consisted of depth to average rooting, depth to moisture \nrestricting layer, and percent silt in the B horizon. The moraine equation \nconsisted of depth to maximum rooting, pore pattern, percent sand and percent \nsilt In the BC horizon. \nThe northeastern Ontario plots were combined with Schmidt and \nCarmean's (1988) 131 plots. New regressions based on the pooled data had R2 \nvalues of 0.84, 0.55, 0.37, 0.57, and 0.24 for bedrock-glaciofluvial, bedrock-moraine, \nglaciofluvial, lacustrine, and moraine landforms, respectively. These \nanalyses produced valid jack pine soil-site equations for the combined bedrock \nand lacustrine landforms in northeastern and north central Ontario; but \nequations combining data for glaciofluvial and moraine landforms were \nimprecise. \nThe northeastern and north central Ontario plots were pooled with 16 \nplots from northwestern Ontario. New regressions based on the pooled data \nhad R2 values of 0.22, 0.47, and 0.17 for glaciofluvial, lacustrine, and moraine \nlandforms, respectively. These analyses resulted in equations that had \nunacceptably low precision. The failure to compute acceptable soil-site \nequations was attributed to different soil and topographic variables influencing \nthe height growth of jack pine in northwestern Ontario.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 it