Mixed‐severity natural disturbance regime dominates in an old‐growth Norway spruce forest of northwest Russia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Quesions What were the long‐term disturbance rates (including variability) and agents in pristine Norway spruce‐dominated ( Picea abies (L.) Karst.) forests? Have soil moisture conditions influenced disturbance rates across this boreal spruce‐dominated forest? Were the temporal recruitment patterns of canopy dominants associated with past disturbance periods? Location Interfluvial region of Northern Dvina and Pinega rivers, Arkhangelsk, northwest Russia. Methods We linked dendrochronological data with tree spatial data ( n trees = 1659) to reconstruct the temporal and spatial patterns of canopy gaps in a 1.8‐ha area from 1831–2008, and to develop a growth‐release chronology from 1775–2008. Results No evidence of stand‐replacing disturbances was found within selected forest stands over the studied period. Forest dynamics were driven by small‐ to moderate‐scale canopy disturbances, which maintained a multi‐cohort age structure. Disturbance peaks were observed in the 1820s, 1920s, 1970s and 2000s, with decadal rates reaching 32% of the stand area disturbed. Conclusions The overall mean decadal rate was 8.3% canopy area disturbed, which suggests a canopy turnover time of 122 yr, with a 95% confidence envelop of 91–186 yr. Bark beetle outbreaks (possibly exacerbated by droughts) and wind‐storms emerged as the principal disturbance agents. Recruitment of both Norway spruce and downy birch was associated with periods of increased canopy disturbance. Moisture conditions (moist vs mesic stands) were not significantly related to long‐term disturbance rates. The studied spruce‐dominated boreal forests of this region apparently exhibited long‐term forest continuity under this mixed‐severity disturbance regime. These disturbances caused considerable structural alterations to forest canopies, but apparently did not result in a pronounced successional shifts in tree species composition, rather occasional minor enrichments of birch in these heavily spruce‐dominated stands.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".