Changes in forest floor bryophyte (moss and liverwort) communities 4 years after forest harvest
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Forest harvest presents a potential threat to forest floor bryophyte communities primarily through alteration of the microclimate and disturbance of substrates on the forest floor. Management, including harvest, applied at the landscape scale creates patches of disturbance of differing severities at the spatial scale experienced by bryophytes. Presumably, bryophyte diversity in managed landscapes is best conserved by forest harvest techniques that minimize community change, thereby allowing disturbed communities to reassemble to approach predisturbance composition. We monitored bryophyte community reassembly by sampling quadrats established in a 54-ha management block of Acadian forest in New Brunswick, before and after harvest. Quadrats were either in unharvested areas, or experienced a range of disturbance severities from removal of some or all canopy, to forest floor disturbance with complete canopy removal. Bryophyte communities showed compositional change over 4 years, even in areas that were not harvested. Although species richness was maintained or recovered 4 years after harvest, changes in species composition were significant in all disturbance classes with greatest change related to forest floor disturbance. In particular, liverworts were lost in areas with forest floor disturbance. We suggest that the simplest method to reduce immediate species loss, and presumably promote conservation of bryophyte communities within managed forest landscapes, is to utilize techniques that reduce the area of forest floor and associated substrates that are physically disrupted.Key words: bryophyte, community change, disturbance, forest harvest, monitoring.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it