Forest dynamics following spruce budworm outbreaks in the northern and southern mixedwoods of central Quebec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of 20th century spruce budworm ( Choristoneura fumiferana (Clem.)) outbreaks on forest dynamics was examined in the southern and northern parts of the mixedwood forest zone in central Quebec, Canada. In each region, three study areas were placed in unmanaged stands that had not burned for more than 200 years. Disturbance impacts and forest succession were evaluated using aerial photographs and dendrochronology. Spruce budworm outbreaks occurred around 1910, 1950, and 1980 in both regions. The 1910 outbreak seemed to have limited impact in both regions, and the 1950 outbreak caused heavy mortality in conifer stands (mostly of balsam fir, Abies balsamea (L.) Mill.) in the southern region. The 1980 outbreak caused major mortality in the northern region, but had little impact in the southern region. Successive spruce budworm outbreaks led to a massive invasion by hardwood species in the last century in the southern region but not in the northern region. The reason for such contrasting dynamics between regions is unknown, but we hypothesize that differences in disturbance intensities, influenced by climate, played a major role. Results from this study emphasize that generalizations about the effect of spruce budworm outbreaks on forest dynamics cannot be derived from observations made during a single outbreak or at a single location.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".