Comparison of the pre-settlement and present diversity of the forests of Central Ontario
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Original Crown Survey notes were used to infer the European pre-settlement \nforest diversity condition in the management units of Algonquin Park, French-Severn, \nNipissing and Temagami in central Ontario, Canada. This diversity condition was then \ncompared to the 1990 diversity of the forests as determined from forest resource \ninventory (FRI) maps. This study compared selected compositional proportions of the \nforest to identify potential changes that have occurred since 1890, \nTen sub-divided townships were randomly selected from Algonquin Park, French- \nSevern and Nipissing while all available non-sub-divided townships were used in the \nmanagement unit of Temagami. The 1890 data represented the pre-settlement condition \nof the forest and acted as the baseline to which the 1990 data was compared. The 1890 \ndata were derived from the original Crown Survey notes which were the forest cruise \nnotes of the day, giving detailed descriptions of the forest cover including species \ncomposition, abundance, diameter at breast height and disturbances. The 1990 data were \nprovided by the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources in the form of FRI maps and \nspreadsheets. The data were sorted into working group proportions, hardwoods and \nsoftwoods, shade tolerance groupings and frequency of occurrence. \nThis study revealed that in terms of changes in working group proportions there \nhave apparently been region wide increases in maple (Acer spp.), while balsam fir (Abies \nbalsamea), hemlock (Tsuga canadensis) and the ?other conifer? group (larch (Larix \nlarcind) and cedar (Thuja occidentalis)) have apparently decreased. This study revealed \nthat there has been an apparent increase in the proportions of hardwoods in the region \nwith a subsequent decrease in the proportion of softwoods. The analysis of shade \ntolerance groupings showed that there seems to have been an increase in the shade \ntolerant species while no large changes have occurred with the mid-tolerant species or the \nshade intolerant species. The regional comparison of frequency of occurrence of each \nspecies revealed that a total of nine of the fourteen species have apparent large changes. \nThis study has shown the usefulness of the Crown Survey notes in reconstructing \nthe pre-settlement condition of these forests. These survey notes were easily available \nand could be simply converted to spreadsheet form. Future forest management plans \nshould attempt to use these data as it will allow for more informed decision-making and \nwill lead to a better understanding of original diversity conditions.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».