MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015921863 · doi:10.5558/tfc2012-079

Using the Carbon Budget Model of the Canadian Forest Sector (CBM-CFS3) to examine the impact of harvest and fire on carbon dynamics in selected forest types of the Canadian Boreal shield

2012· article· en· W2015921863 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Nancy Luckai, Guy R. Larocque, Louis Archambault, David Paré, Robert D. Boutin, Arthur Groot

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest ServiceLakehead University
FundersCanadian Forest ServiceU.S. Forest Service
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceTaigaBlack spruceEcosystemBorealForest ecologyForestrySoil waterForest managementBoreal ecosystemAtmospheric sciencesAgroforestryEcologyGeographySoil scienceBiologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of the study was to assess the responsiveness of the Carbon Budget Model of the Canadian Forest Sector (CBM-CFS3) to management scenarios that included three rotation lengths (50, 100 and 250 years) under harvest and fire disturbances in six forest types (poplar deep soil, black spruce deep soil, jack pine deep and shallow soils, hardwood mixedwood and other conifer lowland). Outputs from five carbon (C) pools were considered: merchantable stemwood (stump height of 30 cm, minimum DBH of 9 cm and a minimum top diameter of 7 cm), deadwood, soil C, total ecosystem C and cumulative total ecosystem C emissions. Yield curves strongly affected the predicted size of all five pools. Longer rotation lengths led to larger pools with the relative differences between rotation lengths varying with stand types. Pools associated with poplar were usually the largest while those of jack pine on shallow sites were generally the smallest. When compared to the starting point of the simulations, cumulative total ecosystem C and C emissions increased with the 100- and 250-year harvest rotations (HARV100 and HARV250, respectively) and declined with the 50-year harvest rotation (HARV50). Fire disturbances resulted in stable pools of cumulative ecosystem C and declines in C emissions. CBM-CFS3 provided realistic pool values but the authors suggest further development of the model depiction of ecosystem processes, especially with respect to the treatment of respiration. In general, the authors recommend that forest management planners consider using an integrated approach that links multiple proven and accepted models under appropriate model linking software.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207