Long-term effects of peatland black spruce regeneration treatments in northeastern Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies of black spruce (Picea mariana (Mill.) BSP) broadcast seeding and of harvest methods for advance regeneration protection were remeasured 17 to 20 years after establishment on peatland sites in northeastern Ontario. The effects of seeding rate on black spruce stocking, density or basal area were apparent at two study locations 20 years after treatment, but high levels of advance regeneration masked seeding rate effects at two other study locations. The effects of different harvest methods on black spruce stocking, density and basal area, which were evident at earlier ages, were no longer statistically significant 17 to 19 years after treatment. Black spruce density increased moderately with time because of gradual recruitment of new seedlings. Density of black spruce stems taller than 1.3 m tall exceeded 4000 ha-1 for nearly all treatments, but these stems were spatially aggregated at the 4-m2 scale. The stand characteristics of these regenerated peatland stands are consistent with site class 2 stands in the Ontario normal yield tables. Key words: black spruce; Picea mariana; advance regeneration; direct seeding; regeneration; peatland; stand dynamics
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".