Effect of seed predation, shade and soil organic matter on the early establishment of eastern white pine and balsam fir seedlings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Eastern white pine (Pinus strobus L.) does not regenerate well in the absence of fire, or without mechanical exposure of mineral soil, while balsam fir (Abies balsamea L. Mill.) is a common understory species on sites occupied by white pine. We conducted two experiments to explain the difference in regenerative success of these two species. First, the effect of shade and soil organic matter on the emergence of white pine and balsam fir were compared using soil monoliths from a regenerating white pine stand. Balsam fir germination was significantly lower than white pine germination at different shade levels and at different levels of soil organic matter. Second, seed predation was compared between balsam fir and white pine in a non-regenerating white pine stand. Predation of white pine seeds was 10 times greater than balsam fir predation even when seeds of white pine and balsam fir were left as a mixture on the forest floor. We speculate that seed predation is a critical factor in white pine succession and that seed predators favour balsam fir succession by selecting white pine seeds. Key words: seed predation, fire ecology, Pinus strobus, Abies balsamea, Peromyscus maniculatus, succession
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".