Claim · model-written summary
Dominant maples grew more than intermediate or codominant maples.
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleTreatmentSettingValueQualifier
Verbatim
e0“Dominant trees grew more than did intermediates or codominants”
t0“maple stand”
Title
Fertilization of a pole-sized maple stand: 10-year results
Douglas M. Stone Canadian Journal of Forest Research 1980. doi:10.1139/x80-028
Other claims from this paper (7)
- Association Initial diameter and stand density greatly influenced maple diameter and basal area growth.
- Association Initial plot basal area accounted for 65% of variation in maple diameter growth.
- Association Initial plot basal area accounted for 49% of variation in maple basal area growth.
- Intervention effect Fertilization decreased diameter growth of suppressed maples.
- Intervention effect Fertilization increased mortality of suppressed maples.
- Intervention effect Intermediate and codominant pole-sized maples tended to respond to nitrogen fertilization, without a statistically significant difference.
- Intervention effect Intermediate and codominant pole-sized maples tended to respond to nitrogen plus phosphorus fertilization, without a statistically significant difference.