Mechanical disturbance impacts on soil properties and lodgepole pine growth in British Columbia’s central interior
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Forest landings are areas located adjacent to haul roads where harvested trees that were skidded from the cutblock are processed and loaded onto trucks. Soils on landings are often excessively compacted by heavy timber harvesting machinery and may take many years to recover from such disturbance. This study examined soil properties and tree growth on unrehabilitated landings (with and without natural regeneration) and adjacent naturally regenerated clearcuts in the central interior of British Columbia (BC), 23 yr after landing construction. Landings (both with and without natural regeneration) had less favorable conditions for tree growth than did clearcuts, including significantly greater surface soil bulk density and mechanical resistance (on some dates) and lower total porosity and concentrations of C and N. Landings without natural regeneration had the least favorable soil conditions, which may account for the lack of natural regeneration. Lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta Dougl. ex Loud. var. latifolia Engelm.) growing on portions of the landings did not differ in height from those growing in adjacent clearcuts. Site index, as estimated using the growth intercept method, did not differ between naturally regenerated landings (21.7 m) and clearcuts (22.0 m), suggesting that the soils may be equally capable of supporting productive forests. Key words: Forest soil disturbance, soil mechanical resistance, soil productivity, soil water content, natural regeneration
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".