MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002765663 · doi:10.1139/x01-227

Overstory litter inputs and nutrient returns in an old-growth temperate forest ecosystem, Olympic National Park, Washington

2002· article· en· W2002765663 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Robert L. Edmonds, Georgia Murray

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlant litterTsugaLitterUnderstoryNutrientEnvironmental scienceTemperate rainforestCoarse woody debrisTemperate climateNutrient cycleBasal areaForest floorThroughfallAgroforestryEcosystemEcologyForestryCanopyBiologyGeographyHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Overstory litterfall rates and nutrient returns were determined in an old-growth temperate rainforest watershed in the Hoh River valley, Olympic National Park, Washington. Litter was sorted into green needles, senescent needles, fine wood, reproductive, and miscellaneous litter (mostly arboreal lichens and mosses). Understory and coarse woody debris inputs were not determined. Total annual overstory litterfall averaged 3594 kg·ha–1 and varied among the six plant communities in the watershed. There was a trend for litterfall to be higher in the upper watershed; elevations ranged from 180 to 850 m. Needles provided the greatest amount of litterfall (60%) with woody litter and other material averaging 18 and 22%, respectively. Highest senescent needle litterfall occurred from July to October, but highest woody litterfall was from January to April. Green needles provided only 3% of annual needle litterfall. Green and senescent needle litterfall were related to western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla (Raf.) Sarg.) basal area, suggesting that this shade-tolerant species was the greatest contributor to needle litterfall. The following quantities (kg·ha–1) of nutrients were returned to the forest floor annually: Ca, 26.8; N, 24.6; K, 4.0; Mg, 3.0; P, 2.9; Mn, 1.7; and Na, 1.2.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.112
Threshold uncertainty score0.222

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations22
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicForest Ecology and Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207