Whitebark pine and white pine blister rust in the Rocky Mountains of Canada and northern Montana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2003–2004, we examined 8031 whitebark pine ( Pinus albicaulis Engelm.) trees and 3812 seedling-establishment sites in 170 plots for mortality and incidence of white pine blister rust ( Cronartium ribicola A. Dietr.). We found blister rust in all but four plots (98%), and 57% of all trees assessed for blister rust were either already dead or showed signs of blister rust infection. Mean percentage of trees infected was highest in the southern Canada – United States border area (∼73%), decreasing to a low in the northern region of Banff National Park, Alberta (∼16%), and then rising (∼60%) in the northern end of the study area in Jasper National Park, Alberta. Stands with higher infection, mortality, and canopy kill of trees and higher presence of rust on seedlings tended to be located on the western side of the Continental Divide. In the eight stands in Waterton Lakes National Park, Alberta, that had been previously assessed in 1996, infection levels increased from 43% to 71%, and mortality increased from 26% to 61%, whereas no change was apparent in Glacier National Park, Montana, stands. The impacts of high mortality and infection levels, high crown kill, and reduced regeneration potential, suggest that the long-term persistence of whitebark pine in the southern part of the study area is in jeopardy.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".