MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7124188389 · doi:10.56588/8pkdk144

ESTIMATION OF THE BIOMASS AND CARBON SEQUESTRATION POTENTIAL OF SELECTED PLANT SPECIES IN GARDENS OF PALANPUR

2025· article· W7124188389 on OpenAlexaff
Sunita Gambhava, Anusha Maitreya, Hitesh Solanki

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Association of Biologicals and Computational Digest · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant responses to elevated CO2
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiomass (ecology)AfforestationSyzygiumAcaciaCarbon sequestrationReforestationCarbon dioxideCrown (dentistry)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The technique of extracting and storing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere is known as carbon sequestration. It is one way to lessen global climate change by lowering the atmosphere concentration of carbon dioxide. The two main forms of carbon sequestration that the USGS is evaluating are geologic and biologic. The research area of choice is Palanpur gardens which is located in Banaskantha, Gujarat, India. For the research I have selected three gardens in Palanpur which are Meena Bagh, District Garden and Shashivan. The study was conducted with quadrate random sampling method. There were 40 quadrates taken of 10x10 m2. In the research, 40 species, including 150 individuals have been recorded in Palanpur gardens. The field data of the trees analyzed using the random sampling of quadrate method, which shows the dominant tree species in each quadrate is Azardirachta indica as total of 16 tree species in 13 quadrates. While the dominant species found in 40 quadrates which are Acacia catechu, Acacia nilotica, Aegle marmelos (L) corr, Albizia labbeck, Annona squamosa, Bombax ceiba, Caryota urens, Cassia fistula, Cordia diacotoma G. Forst, Delonix regia, Ficus recemosa, Ficus religiosa, Hyophorbe langenicaulis, Nyctanthus arbortristis Linn, Pithecellobium dulce, Polyalthia longifolia and Syzygium cumini with the total number of species 4, 4, 4, 4, 6, 5, 4, 4, 4, 6, 6, 6, 7, 4, 4, 15, 4 respectively.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.306
Threshold uncertainty score0.293

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.206 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Association of Biologicals and Computational DigestSame topicPlant responses to elevated CO2French-language works237,207