Temporal, spatial, and structural patterns of adult trembling aspen and white spruce mortality in Quebec's boreal forest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Temporal, spatial, and structural patterns of adult trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx.) and white spruce (Picea glauca (Moench) Voss) mortality were studied in intact 150-year-old stands in the southwestern boreal forest of Quebec. For both species, mortality decreases (number of dead trees/total number of trees) with distance from the lake edge until 100150 m, from which point it slightly increases. Strong peaks in mortality were found for 40- to 60-year-old aspen mainly between 1974 and 1992. Such mortality in relatively young aspen is likely related to competition for light from the dominant canopy trees. Also, the recruitment of this young aspen cohort is presumably the result of a stand breakup that occurred when the initial aspen-dominated stand was between 90 and 110 years old. For spruce, strong peaks in mortality were found in 110- to 150-year-old trees and they occurred mainly after 1980. No clear explanation could be found for these peaks, but we suggest that they may be related to senescence or weakening of the trees following the last spruce budworm outbreak. Suppressed and codominant aspen had a much higher mortality ratio than spruce in the same height class, while more surprisingly, no difference in mortality rate was found between dominant trees of the two species. Most spruce trees were found as standing dead, which leads us to reject the hypothesis that windthrow is an important cause of mortality for spruce in our forests.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".