MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973929001 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0048859

Evaluation of Forest Recovery over Time and Space Using Permanent Plots Monitored over 30 Years in a Jamaican Montane Rain Forest

2012· article· en· W1973929001 on OpenAlexaff
Shauna‐Lee Chai, John R. Healey, E. V. J. Tanner

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsAlberta Innovates
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilGates Cambridge TrustCambridge Trust
KeywordsBasal areaBiodiversityRange (aeronautics)Index (typography)EcologyBiologyForestryEnvironmental scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conservation of tropical forest biodiversity increasingly depends on its recovery following severe human disturbance. Our ability to measure recovery using current similarity indices suffers from two limitations: different sized individuals are treated as equal, and the indices are proportionate (a community with twice the individuals of every species as compared with the reference community would be assessed as identical). We define an alternative recovery index for trees - the Tanner index, as the mean of the quantitative Bray-Curtis similarity indices of species composition for stem density and for basal area. We used the new index to compare the original (pre-gap) and post-gap composition of five experimental gap plots (each 90-100 m(2)) and four control plots over 24-35 years in the Blue Mountains of Jamaica. After 24-35 years, these small gaps surrounded by undisturbed forest had recovered 68% of the sum of per species stem density and 29% of the sum of per species basal area, a recovery index of 47%. Four endemic species were especially reduced in density and basal area. With the incorporation of basal area and stem density, our index reduces over-estimations of forest recovery obtained using existing similarity indices (by 24%-41%), and thus yields more accurate estimates of forest conservation status. Finally, our study indicates that the two kinds of comparisons: 1) over time between pre-gap and post-gap composition and 2) over space between gap plots and spatial controls (space-for-time substitution) yield broadly similar results, which supports the value of using space-for-time substitutions in studying forest recovery, at least in this tropical montane forest.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations14
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207