Structure, composition, and diversity of old-growth black spruce boreal forest of the Clay Belt region in Quebec and Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Old-growth black spruce (Picea mariana) boreal forest in the Clay Belt region of Ontario and Quebec is an open forest with a low canopy, quite different from what many consider to be "old growth". Here, we provide an overview of the characteristics of old-growth black spruce forest for three different site types on organic, clay, and coarse deposits. Our objectives were (1) to identify the extent of older forests; (2) to describe the structure, composition, and diversity in different age classes; and (3) to identify key processes in old-growth black spruce forest. We sampled canopy composition, deadwood abundance, understorey composition, and nonvascular plant species in 91 forest stands along a chronosequence that extended from 20 to more than 250 years after fire. We used a peak in tree basal area, which occurred at 100 years on clay and coarse sites and at 200 years on organic sites, as a process-based means of defining the start of old-growth forest. Old-growth forests are extensive in the Clay Belt, covering 3050% of the forested landscape. Black spruce was dominant on all organic sites, and in all older stands. Although there were fewer understorey species and none exclusive to old-growth, these forests were structurally diverse and had greater abundance of Sphagnum, epiphytic lichens, and ericaceous species. Paludification, a process characteristic of old-growth forest stands on clay deposits in this region, causes decreases in tree and deadwood abundance. Old-growth black spruce forests, therefore, lack the large trees and snags that are characteristic of other old-growth forests. Small-scale disturbances such as spruce budworm and windthrow are common, creating numerous gaps. Landscape and stand level management strategies could minimize structural changes caused by harvesting, but unmanaged forest in all stages of development must be preserved in order to conserve all the attributes of old-growth black spruce forest. Key words: boreal forest, old growth, paludification, Picea mariana, structural development, succession.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".