The effects of fire and salvage logging on early post-fire succession in mixedwood boreal forest communities of Saskatchewan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study compared the effects of fire severity and salvage logging on early successional vegetation in the mixedwood boreal forest upland of Saskatchewan. The effects of salvage logging on post-fire forest stands are poorly understood. Few studies have investigated the short-term effects of salvage logging on the regeneration of boreal plant species or the long-term impact on overall forest composition and diversity. This study examines salvage logged and wildfire leave stands across three burn severity classes (no burn, low/moderate burn, and high burn) over two time periods (1 year post-fire and 10 years post-fire). The results indicate that salvage logging has a significant impact on the early regeneration of burned mixedwood boreal plant communities with the effect still evident in forest stands ten years post-fire. Salvage logging has long-lasting residual effects on boreal forest plant community development. Salvage logging one year post-fire reduced the number, diversity, and abundance of species within each of the burn severities, creating a less abundant and simplified plant community. It was also shown that salvage logging one year post-fire tended to create more homogenous plant communities similar to those communities typical of areas of moderate burn severity, constraining the effects of burn severity and decreasing the range of the vegetation communities. These findings are less pronounced, but still evident, within salvage logged stands ten years post-fire as three regrowth cover types have developed, characterised by no disturbance, moderate disturbance either by fire or salvage logging, and severe disturbance. The convergence of plant community characteristics between burn severity classes across logging treatments suggests that the effects of salvage logging do not have long lasting effects within areas of high burn severity.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".