The impact of root exclusion on duff moisture and fire danger
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The impact of root water uptake on duff (both fibric and humic horizons) moisture was investigated at deciduous, mixedwood, and conifer stands in Ontario, Canada. Roots were actively excluded from the duff layer using geotextiles inserted at the duff–mineral soil interface and along the plot edges; liquid and vapour water flow was otherwise not affected by the geotextiles. Root exclusion caused little difference in duff moisture content prior to early June, after which the root exclusion plots remained at 15%–20% volumetric water content, whereas root-intact plots declined to as low as 5% volumetric water content during rain-free periods. Only in the root-intact plots did the duff water content reach sufficiently low levels that duff evaporation was limited by low water content. The net effect of root exclusion was to reduce the cumulative growing season water loss in the duff by 19%–31%, depending on the stand type. Root exclusion also decreased the number of days with a high probability of duff smouldering from as many as 72 days·year−1 to as few as 0 days·year−1. This root exclusion experiment provides a model for short-term duff moisture transitions under thinned forests such as those forests under community wildfire protection.
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 | 0.000 | 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".