Tree species and soil nutrient profiles in old-growth forests of the Oregon Coast Range
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Old-growth forests of the Pacific Northwest provide a unique opportunity to examine tree species – soil relationships in ecosystems that have developed without significant human disturbance. We characterized foliage, forest floor, and mineral soil nutrients associated with four canopy tree species (Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirbel) Franco), western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla (Raf.) Sarg.), western redcedar (Thuja plicata Donn ex D. Don), and bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum Pursh)) in eight old-growth forests of the Oregon Coast Range. The greatest forest floor accumulations of C, N, P, Ca, Mg, and K occurred under Douglas-fir, primarily due to greater forest floor mass. In mineral soil, western hemlock exhibited significantly lower Ca concentration and sum of cations (Ca + Mg + K) than bigleaf maple, with intermediate values for Douglas-fir and western redcedar. Bigleaf maple explained most species-based differences in foliar nutrients, displaying high concentrations of N, P, Ca, Mg, and K. Foliar P and N:P variations largely reflected soil P variation across sites. The four tree species that we examined exhibited a number of individualistic effects on soil nutrient levels that contribute to biogeochemical heterogeneity in these ecosystems. Where fire suppression and long-term succession favor dominance by highly shade-tolerant western hemlock, our results suggest a potential for declines in both soil Ca availability and soil biogeochemical heterogeneity in old-growth 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 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 | 0.000 | 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".