MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1839475341 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2012-0038

A chronsequential approach to investigating microbial community shifts following clearcutting in Boreal Plain forest soils

2012· article· en· W1839475341 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Holly M. Hynes, James J. Germida

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChronosequenceMicrositeClearcuttingMicrobial population biologyBiomass (ecology)EcologySoil waterPinus contortaBiologyEnvironmental scienceAgronomySeedling

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Impacts of forest harvesting are often assessed in short-term studies that ignore the longer term changes associated with the disturbance. A chronosequence approach was taken to investigate changes in microbial community size and composition over ∼20 years post-harvest in lodgepole pine ( Pinus contorta Douglas ex Loudon) stands of the Boreal Plain. The LFH and mineral Ae horizons of Orthic Gray Luvisolic soils were sampled in six cutblocks, aged 1–19 years since harvest, in 2009 and 2010. Changes in microbial communities were assessed using phospholipid fatty acid analysis (PLFA) and 16S rDNA analysis. Physical and chemical soil parameters were measured to delineate microsite changes impacting microbial community shifts. Total microbial biomass (PLFA) was unaffected by harvesting disturbance, although fungal biomass was significantly larger in the oldest cutblock of the chronosequence. Microbial community composition did, however, differ between younger and older cutblocks as indicated by both lipid PLFA and 16S rDNA fingerprinting techniques. Forest soil microbial communities subject to clearcutting were observed to shift in overall community composition while remaining consistent in overall community size. The shift in community composition, which occurred in concert with the maintenance of biomass, indicated that the microbial community adapted sufficiently to the new post-harvest microsite conditions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations14
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest Research→Same topicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics→French-language works237,207→