Partial windthrow as a driving process of forest dynamics in old-growth boreal forests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As climate changes, boreal forest ecosystems may become subject to disturbances that were previously uncommon in some regions. In recent decades, large tracts of northeastern boreal forest of Canada have been affected by different types of climatic events causing a lot of partial and some total stand mortality. Since these disturbances may become more important drivers of forest dynamics, there is a need to document their impact on forest structure. The objectives of this study were to describe temporal dynamics of partial windthrows and determine the effect of partial windthrow on stand composition and understory vegetation. The study was conducted in the North-Shore region of Quebec (Canada). Eighteen plots in closed forests were paired with 18 adjacent windthrow areas, in which trees experienced similar edaphic and climatic conditions. Dendroecological analyses, combined with vegetation sampling, were conducted on each site to determine stand structure and vegetation development through time. Significant increases in balsam fir and shade-tolerant species were observed in windthrow gaps. Tree mortality in windthrown stands was a slow process until the mid-1990s, a period during which spruce budworm defoliation may have played a role in weakening trees and making them more vulnerable to partial windthrow. Greater mortality observed following the mid-1990s was most certainly related to a regional storm. The initial composition of stands plays an important role in driving postwindthrow succession, as balsam fir is more susceptible to treefall. As opposed to stand-replacing windthrow and spruce budworm outbreaks that generate various postdisturbance responses, partial windthrow appears to only create opportunities for pre-established balsam fir to undergo release in gaps.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".