Effects of two silvicultural regimes with large tree retention on epiphytic macrolichen communities in Adirondack northern hardwoods, New York, USA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We sampled epiphytic lichen communities in nine Adirondack northern hardwood stands: three old growth, three reserve shelterwood, and three single-tree selection systems. Our objectives were to assess the effects of treatment, tree diameter at breast height, and their interaction on lichen communities and to determine whether lichen traits were associated with particular habitats. Lichen community composition was strongly related to tree diameter at breast height and differed between old growth and reserve shelterwoods. Lichen community composition was also related to an interaction between tree size and stand type. Lobaria pulmonaria (L.) Hoffm. was associated with large trees in old growth, whereas Evernia mesomorpha Nyl., Parmelia sulcata Taylor, and Physcia millegrana Degel. characterized those in shelterwood stands. Nitrophilous lichens were most common on small trees and in reserve shelterwoods, whereas small trees in selection systems and old growth supported lichens that were found to be most associated with larger trees overall. Selection systems apparently maintained lichen communities indistinguishable from those in old growth or reserve shelterwood. Because large trees hosted unique epiphyte assemblages particularly rich in fruticose and cyanolichen species, we expect that management retaining few or no large trees will alter epiphytic lichen communities.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".