Changes in white pine blister rust infection and mortality in limber pine over time
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Limber pine (Pinus flexilis E. James) is under threat from white pine blister rust (WPBR), mountain pine beetle, drought, and fire suppression across its range in western North America. In 2003–2004, we established 85 plots to assess the mortality and incidence of WPBR on limber pine, and remeasured them in 2009. Infection was evident in 74% of the plots in 2003–2004 and 88% of the plots in 2009. The proportion of dead trees increased from 32% in 2003–2004 to 35% in 2009. The percentage of live trees infected increased from 33% in 2003–2004 to 43% in 2009. Mean live limber pine basal area in 2009 ranged from 0.03 to 77.8 m2/ha per plot. Twenty (24%) of the plots had no seedlings in the first measurement, but only 15% in the second measurement. Seedling infection was low (8% in 2003–2004 and 4% in 2009). In 12 plots that were measured three times, mortality increased from 30% of all trees in 1996 to 50% in 2003, then decreased to 46% in 2009. Infection decreased from 73% of live trees in 1996 to 46% in 2003, then increased to 66% in 2009. High mortality and infection levels suggest that the long-term persistence of many limber pine populations in the southern part of the study area are in jeopardy, and continued monitoring is needed to assist with management decisions.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".