MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2006867199 · doi:10.1139/f00-264

A regional paleolimnological assessment of the impact of clear-cutting on lakes from the central interior of British Columbia

2001· article· en· W2006867199 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Kathleen R. Laird, Brian F. Cumming

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiatomLoggingPaleolimnologyEnvironmental scienceSedimentClearcuttingAbundance (ecology)EcologyRelative species abundanceOrganic matterPhysical geographyHydrology (agriculture)GeographyGeologyBiologyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The impact of forest harvesting on lakes within the central interior of British Columbia was examined in a paleolimnological study of six lakes that had 28–82% of their watersheds clear-cut (impact lakes) and four lakes that had experienced no logging in their watersheds (reference lakes). Changes in diatom species composition and percent organic matter in210Pb-dated sediment cores were compared over the last 80 years in each of the impact lakes before and after the onset of forest harvesting and, in the reference lakes, before and after 1960 (the average onset of logging in five of the six impact lakes) and before and after 1975 (the onset of logging in one impact lake). Significant changes in species composition of diatoms following forest-harvesting activities were detected in four of the impact lakes and three of the reference lakes; however, the changes in diatom species composition were small, with changes in the relative abundance of the most common species being at most 11%. Significant increases in the percent organic matter after 1960 were found in one impact lake and three reference lakes; again these changes were small, with increases of 2–5%.

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)0.001
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 score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.176

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations32
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research→French-language works237,207→