MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1908623813 · doi:10.22230/jem.2009v10n2a421

Forest management and maintenance of ectomycorrhizae: A case study of green tree retention in south-coastal British Columbia

2009· article· en· W1908623813 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Renata A. Outerbridge, J. A. Trofymow

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Ecosystems and Management · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest Service
FundersCanadian Forest ServiceU.S. Forest Service
KeywordsColonizationMicrositeSpecies richnessContext (archaeology)TransectBiologyColonisationClearcuttingEcologyForestryHorticultureGeographySeedling

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Assessment of ectomycorrhizal (EM) colonization was carried out in a variable green tree retention experimental block near Powell River, British Columbia. We hypothesized that increasing retention level enhances colonization of EM fungi onto seedlings in harvested areas. We also investigated the role of isolated trees in EM maintenance. Transects were established in treatments where 0% (a clearcut), 5%, 10%, and 30% of trees were retained. Douglas-fir seedlings (Pseudotsuga menziesii) were planted at 5, 15, 25 and 45 m from the remaining forest edge and excavated 18 months later for analysis of EM colonization. Within the forest, soil cores and sporocarp surveys provided information on EM species potentially available for colonization of seedlings. We observed a total of 85 EM morphotypes. The edge effects—declines with distance from the forest, observed in the 0% retention treatment—were diminished in the higher-retention treatments. EM richness and root colonization increased insignificantly with increasing tree retention when the influence of ubiquitous early-stage EM fungi and inherent microsite differences were accounted for. EM diversity next to isolated trees was greater than at 10 m from the trees, but lower than at 5 m from the forest edge. We discuss the implications of these relationships and the role of isolated trees in the context of these exploratory findings. While these results suggest certain trends, they are for a single installation and their applicability to forests elsewhere in the region needs further study.

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)0.001
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 score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.112

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations22
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Ecosystems and ManagementSame topicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant InteractionsFrench-language works237,207