MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992645407 · doi:10.1890/11-2277.1

Estimation of snag carbon transfer rates by ecozone and lead species for forests in Canada

2012· article· en· W1992645407 on OpenAlexaffabout
A. B. Hilger, Cindy Shaw, Juha M. Metsaranta, Werner A. Kurz

Bibliographic record

VenueEcological Applications · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest Service
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSnagCoarse woody debrisEnvironmental scienceProxy (statistics)Dead treeForestryEcologyDiameter at breast heightGeographyBiologyMathematicsStatisticsHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Standing dead trees (snags) and downed woody debris contribute substantially to the carbon (C) budget of Canada's forest. Accurate parameterization of the C transfer rates (CTRs) from snags to downed woody debris is important for forest C dynamics models such as the Carbon Budget Model of the Canadian Forest Sector (CBM-CFS3), but CTRs are rarely measured or reported in the literature. Therefore, forest C models generally use snag fall rates (FRs) available in the literature, as a proxy for CTRs. However, FRs are based on stem counts while CTRs refer to mass transfers. Stem mass and stem number are not linearly related, with small diameter trees representing disproportionately lower C mass transfers. Therefore this proxy, while convenient, may bias C transfer from standing dead to downed woody material. Here, we combined tree data from 10802 sample plots and previously published species-specific individual-tree relationships between tree diameter (diameter at breast height, dbh) and fall rate to derive stand-level estimates of CTRs for the CBM-CFS3. We estimated CTRs and FRs and used the FR values to validate this approach by comparing them with standardized FR values compiled from the literature. FRs generally differed from CTRs. The overall CTR (4.78% +/- 0.02% per year, mean +/- SE) was significantly smaller than the overall FR (5.40% +/- 0.02% per year; mean +/- SE). Both the difference between FR and CTR (FR - CTR) and the CTR itself varied by ecozone, with ecozone means for CTR ranging from 3.94% per year to 10.02% per year. This variation was explained, in part, by heterogeneity in species composition, size (dbh distribution), structure, and age of the stands. The overall mean CTR estimated for the Snag_Stemwood (4.78% per year) and the Snag_Branches (11.95% per year) pools of the CBM-CFS3 were approximately 50% and 20% higher than the current default rates used in the CBM-CFS3 of 3.2% and 10.0%, respectively. Our results demonstrate that using CTRs to estimate the annual C transfer from standing dead trees to downed woody biomass will yield more accurate estimates of C fluxes than using a FR proxy, and this accuracy could be further improved by accounting for differences in ecozone, stand component (hardwood or softwood), or lead species.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.709
Threshold uncertainty score0.970

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations34
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcological ApplicationsSame topicForest Ecology and Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207