Structure and dynamics of trembling aspen white spruce mixed stands near Fort Nelson, B.C.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx.) white spruce (Picea glauca (Moench) Voss) mixed woods near Fort Nelson are distinguished by the large size of individual trees, longevity, and the low occurrence of internal decay in trembling aspen. The development of these forest ecosystems has had limited documentation and may be significantly different than those described in other portions of the boreal forest. At five study stands, stem analysis techniques were used to examine the patterns of height and radial growth over time according to species and structure type. There were two patterns of species establishment that were consistent with the stand structure. In codominant stands, recruitment periods for trembling aspen and white spruce overlapped. The stratified stands were consistently associated with a 29- to 58-year lag in white spruce recruitment. Spruce that were codominant with aspen at the time of sampling had sustained periods of rapid height and diameter growth. White spruce that were later to establish on site had slower rates of height and diameter growth. White spruce ages indicated that a dominant recruitment episode was more common than continuous recruitment. Height and diameter growth of trembling aspen were similar in both stand types. The differences in trembling aspen growth patterns between stands were due to site quality. The white spruce in codominant stands did not appear to go through a period of suppression and then release associated with stand-level trembling aspen mortality, as commonly described for other boreal mixedwoods. The vigor and longevity of trembling aspen in Fort Nelson appear to prolong the period of trembling aspen domination of mixed stands well beyond the time periods observed in other boreal ecosystems.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".