Gap dynamics in aspen stands of the Clay Belt of northwestern Quebec following a forest tent caterpillar outbreak
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Forest tent caterpillar (FTC; Malacosoma disstria Hübner) outbreaks represent an important natural disturbance in broadleaf-dominated stands; however, their effects on forest gap dynamics are not well understood. To describe such effects on canopy gaps and tree recruitment patterns, we investigated 20 trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx.) dominated stands defoliated severely over 0 to 3 years during the last outbreak (1998–2003) in the northwestern Clay Belt of Quebec. Results show that canopy opening more than tripled (12.3%–43.7%) from 0 to 3 years of severe defoliation, and mean gap size was more than 12 times greater (7.2–87.5 m2) over the same gradient. Regeneration patterns suggest that aspen recruitment is not sufficient to completely restore closed canopies in stands defoliated 0, 1, and 2 years, whereas it should be sufficient in stands defoliated 3 years, where large gaps allow trembling aspen establishment. Our results clearly indicate that FTC outbreaks represent an important factor of gap formation in trembling aspen stands. At the stand level, gaps create uneven stand structures, and at the landscape level, FTC defoliation duration creates a large range of even to uneven stand structures.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".