Dynamics of an old-growth, fire-initiated, subalpine forest in southern interior British Columbia: tree size, age, and spatial structure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We used dendrochronological analysis of over 2000 trees in four 50 × 50 m plots to reconstruct the history and dynamics of a 330-year-old, fire-initiated spruce-fir forest. All lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta Dougl. ex Loud.), half of the canopy Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii Parry ex Engelm.), but less than 10% of the canopy subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa (Hook.) Nutt.) dated from the first 50 years of stand development. Tree-ring patterns of individual surviving trees showed no evidence of disturbance during the first 200 years after stand initiation; subsequently, episodes of disturbance are indicated by periods of release in understory fir. Although many fir owe their canopy position to release after disturbance, few canopy fir in the current stand established in response to either the stand-initiating event or subsequent partial disturbances. A seedling bank of long-lived fir appears critical to the dynamics of this forest. In contrast, establishment of almost all canopy spruce can be related to disturbance. This stand, although fire initiated, was structured primarily by a combination of partial disturbances and autogenic processes. We suspect that most old, fire-initiated stands in many forest regions are similarly structured and emphasize that the contribution of partial disturbances and autogenic processes should be fully assessed when examining their dynamics or managing such forests.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".