MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1910055820 · doi:10.1139/x2012-042

The influence of bigleaf maple on chemical properties of throughfall, stemflow, and forest floor in coniferous forest in the Pacific Northwest

2012· article· en· W1910055820 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Khaled Ahmad Hamdan, Margaret Schmidt

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLichen and fungal ecology
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStemflowThroughfallMapleForest floorCanopyMicrositeEnvironmental scienceForestryAgroforestryEcologyBotanyBiologySoil scienceGeographySoil waterSeedling

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is predicted that bigleaf maple ( Acer macrophyllum Pursh) will almost double in frequency in British Columbia by 2085 due to climate change. We address whether its frequency increase could influence chemical properties of throughfall, stemflow, and forest floor due to species-specific effects. Eight plots with a single bigleaf maple tree in the centre of conifers were paired with eight Douglas-fir ( Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco) plots without bigleaf maple. Compared with conifer plots, bigleaf maple throughfall and stemflow had higher pH and K concentration. The under-canopy and near-trunk forest floor associated with bigleaf maple showed higher pH, total exchangeable bases, cation-exchange capacity, and concentrations of exchangeable Ca and Mg. In addition, the near-trunk forest floor had higher base saturation and concentrations and contents of NO 3 -N and contents of total N and S. Throughfall and stemflow beneath bigleaf maple appear to contribute to higher pH and N availability in the forest floor. The results suggest that there is a soil microsite around bigleaf maple stems that is influenced by stemflow. These enriched microsites proximal to bigleaf maple trunks would allow bigleaf maple to have legacy effects on soil fertility and promote conifer productivity later in succession following bigleaf maple mortality.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.745
Threshold uncertainty score0.974

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicLichen and fungal ecologyFrench-language works237,207