Abundance and function of large woody debris in small, headwater streams in the Rocky Mountain foothills of Alberta, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Large woody debris (LWD) significantly influences the structure and function of small headwater streams. However, what it contributes to geomorphic function depends on where it is located relative to the stream channel. We quantified LWD abundance and tested for associations among decay, position, orientation and function classes in 21 streams near Hinton, Alberta, Canada. LWD was more frequent (64.0 ± 3.3 LWD 100 m−1) in streams in the Alberta foothills than it was in small streams in mountain, coastal, broadleaf deciduous and boreal forests, likely due to the narrow channel widths and low capacity of our study streams to transport logs downstream. LWD volumes were greater in coastal streams than in the Alberta foothills, likely due to differing tree sizes and decay rates. LWD morphology changed significantly as logs decayed and transitioned to different position and orientation classes. LWD in decay classes I and II were longest, most commonly in the bridge and partial bridge position classes, oriented perpendicular to stream flow, suspended above the channel and contributing least to stream geomorphic functions. LWD length and volume (but not diameter) decreased as decay advanced, making logs less stable. LWD in decay classes III and IV were strongly associated with partially bridged, loose, and buried position classes. They were more commonly diagonal or parallel to stream flow and contributed to bank stability, sediment retention, debris jams and riffle and pool formations. These results have been integrated into a conceptual model of LWD dynamics that provides a framework for future research on the mechanisms and rates of LWD recruitment, decay, transport and function. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".