MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969538860 · doi:10.1139/x2012-147

Fire-injured ponderosa pine provide a pulsed resource for bark beetles

2012· article· en· W1969538860 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ryan S. Davis, Sharon M. Hood, Barbara Bentz

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Forest ServiceRocky Mountain Research StationJohns Hopkins University
KeywordsDendroctonusBark beetleBroodBark (sound)Mountain pine beetleBiologyWoody plantColonizationEcologyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bark beetles can cause substantial mortality of trees that would otherwise survive fire injuries. Resin response of fire-injured northern Rocky Mountain ponderosa pine ( Pinus ponderosa Douglas ex P. Lawson & C. Lawson) and specific injuries that contribute to increased bark beetle attack susceptibility and brood production are unknown. We monitored ponderosa pine mortality and resin flow and bark beetle colonization and reproduction following a prescribed fire in Idaho and a wildfire in Montana. The level of fire-caused tree injury differed between the two sites, and the level of tree injury most susceptible to bark beetle attack and colonization also differed. Strip-attacked trees alive 3 years post-fire had lower levels of bole and crown injury than trees mass attacked and killed by bark beetles, suggesting that fire-injured trees were less well defended. Brood production of western pine beetle ( Dendroctonus brevicomis LeConte) did not differ between fire-injured and uninjured trees, although mountain pine beetle ( Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins) brood production was low in both tree types, potentially due to competition with faster developing bark beetle species that also colonized trees. Despite a large number of live trees remaining at both sites, bark beetle response to fire-injured trees pulsed and receded within 2 years post-fire, potentially due to a limited number of trees that could be easily colonized.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.211
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.262 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations67
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicForest Insect Ecology and ManagementFrench-language works237,207