Comparison of the Ground Vegetation in Spruce Plantations and Natural Forest in the Greater Fundy Ecosystem, New Brunswick
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We studied changes in ground vegetation associated with the conversion of natural, mature, mixed-species forest into conifer plantations in southeastern New Brunswick. This was done to determine the degree to which plant-associated biodiversity was affected by this forestry practice. Species of lichens, bryophytes, and vascular plants were examined in a 21-year chronosequence of 12 Black Spruce (Picea mariana) plantations and compared to 8 stands of natural forest of the type replaced. The richness, diversity, and density of species were greatest during younger stages of the plantation sere, with as many as 170 species occurring in a 6-year-old stand. Species occurred in successional stages according to their abilities to: (a) survive disturbances associated with clear-cutting and plantation establishment; (b) regenerate vegetatively; (c) re-establish from a persistent seedbank; (d) invade disturbed habitat by dispersed seeds; and/or (e) tolerate environmental stress imposed by the overtopping canopy during stand development. Multivariate analyses suggested that successional factors had the strongest influence on differences in the ground vegetation among stands of various ages. Gaps in the canopy of reference forest and older plantations provided microsite conditions similar to those of early seral stages, allowing some ruderal species to persist in older stands. Nonindigenous species were almost entirely limited to younger plantations. Some species of natural forest were rare or absent from plantations and may be at risk from the extensive development of these agroforestry habitats in our study region; these included Acer pensylvanicum, Cephaloziella spp., Chiloscyphus spp., Fagus grandifolia, Lepidozia reptans, Nowellia curvifolia, Odontoschisma denudatum, and Viburnum alnifolium.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".