MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1528838407 · doi:10.22621/cfn.v128i4.1635

Grouseberry (<em>Vaccinium scoparium</em> Leiberg ex Coville) fruit production in forest openings in Banff National Park, Alberta

2015· article· en· W1528838407 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Ian Pengelly, David Hamer

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Field-Naturalist · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsCanmore Museum and Geoscience Centre
FundersParks Canada
KeywordsUnderstoryCanopyShrubShrublandEnvironmental scienceNational parkSecondary forestVacciniumTree canopyAgroforestryForestryEcosystemEcologyGeographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Grouseberry (Vaccinium scoparium Leiberg ex Coville) is an abundant dwarf shrub in the understory of many areas of subalpine forest in Banff National Park and has the potential to produce fruit important for wildlife. However, the suppression and prevention of wildfires, which began in the early 1900s in the park, have reduced fire-dependent shrubland and open forest and increased the extent of closed, mature forest. Because canopy closure is typically associated with decreased fruit production by understory shrubs, the decline in fire disturbance may be reducing Grouseberry fruit production. To quantify this effect, we measured Grouseberry fruit production under various forest canopies at 10 sites in Banff during 2004–2012. We measured site openness by modeling photosynthetically active direct solar radiation (dPAR) adjusted for overshadowing by topography and coniferous foliage. We found a positive relation between Grouseberry fruit production and dPAR in 2006 and 2010–2012, but not in 2008 or 2009, the 2 years of lowest fruit production; data were lacking for 2004, 2005, and 2007. We also recorded high Grouseberry fruit densities beginning 5 years after fire removed the forest canopy in four prescribed burns conducted during 2001: fruit production was 3.3 to more than 20 times that in adjacent mature forests in 5 of the 6 years analyzed. This study shows the potential ecological benefits of both prescribed burns and wildfire in upper subalpine forests where Grouseberry is widespread, but fruit production is low under the forest canopy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.223

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.208 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Field-NaturalistSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207