Monitoring limber pine health in the Rocky Mountains and North Dakota
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Limber pine (Pinus flexilis James) is an ecologically and culturally important, yet little studied, tree species within the Western United States. Its distribution extends from Alberta and southeastern British Colombia to New Mexico, Arizona, and southeastern California with isolated populations in North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, eastern Oregon, and southwestern California (Burns and Honkala 1990). Limber pine has a very wide elevational distribution as well, ranging from 2,850 feet in North Dakota to 12,500 feet in Colorado (Burns and Honkala 1990). Limber pines serve many important ecological functions such as providing food for wildlife, stabilizing slopes, regulating snow retention and runoff, and maintaining cover on harsh, rugged sites where little else can grow (Schoettle 2004). They are some of the oldest and largest pines in the Rocky Mountains and are especially valued because of their unique cultural and ecological characteristics. However, recent reports suggest that they are experiencing significant ecological impacts as the result of the exotic invasive disease white pine blister rust (Cronartium ribicola J. C. Fisch. ex Rabenh.) and other damaging agents (Blodgett and others 2005, Kearns and Jacobi 2007). Information on the status of limber pines and the long-term ecological impacts of this disease is needed to facilitate management and restoration efforts. The objectives of this study were to (1) assess the current ecological impacts of white pine blister rust on limber pine within white pine blister rust-infested and threatened areas of the Rocky Mountains and a small outlying population in North Dakota, (2) establish plots for future re-measurement to assess long-term and cumulative ecological impacts, and (3) gather baseline information needed to sustain, protect, and restore impacted stands.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 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".