Investigating productivity and foliar nutrient status in second growth white spruce (Picea glauca) and trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis synthesizes two related papers investigating competitive interactions of second growth white spruce (Picea glauca [Moench] Voss) and trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx.) at the Fallingsnow Ecosystem Project sites near Thunder Bay, Ontario. In the first paper, biweekly white spruce foliar concentrations and ratios of N, P, K, Ca, Mg and micronutrients were analyzed for 12 trees of varying mixture proportion, throughout the 2010 growing season. Results were analyzed with repeated measures design to determine patterns in foliar nutrient concentrations, including seasonal stability and the effect of mixture proportion on the timing of these relationships. Seasonal trends were evident in concentrations of N, P, K and Ca, as well as in many nutrient ratios (Ca/N, Mg/N, Mn/N and Zn/N). Significantly lower foliar P, K and P/N and higher Ca, Ca/N, Mn/N and Zn/N were observed in foliage from spruce trees in spruce dominated stands. The presence of aspen appeared to influence the amount and duration of nutrient uptake. These results suggest that it is important to differentiate between mixed- and mono-cultures for foliar nutrient research in plantation white spruce.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".