MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019231546 · doi:10.1139/x02-150

Community and population dynamics of sprucefir forests on Whiteface Mountain, New York: recent trends, 19852000

2003· article· en· W2019231546 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
John J. Battles, Timothy J. Fahey, Thomas G. Siccama, Arthur H. Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNew York State Department of Environmental ConservationU.S. Forest ServiceNational Science Foundation
KeywordsCanopyPicea engelmanniiForestryMontane ecologyVegetation (pathology)PopulationTree canopyBiomass (ecology)Stand developmentEcologyPicea abiesForest dynamicsGeographyBiologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We remeasured two sets of permanent plots in old-growth, spruce–fir forests on Whiteface Mountain to quantify ongoing vegetation dynamics at sites impacted by spruce decline. One set of plots was a stratified random sample of the vegetation in a subalpine watershed (Baldwin site). The other was selected to represent forest conditions in a high-elevation subset of the spruce–fir forest (Esther site). Between 1987 and 1997, there was a significant increase in aboveground tree biomass at Baldwin with the majority of the increment due to the growth of canopy-sized trees. This growth occurred with little change in either species composition or size structure. The annual mortality rate of 1.2%·year–1 for canopy-sized red spruce (Picea rubens Sarg.) in Baldwin almost matched the recruitment rate of 1.4 stems/ha per year. In addition, the relative growth rate of spruce was significantly faster than associated species. In contrast, spruce trees in Esther died at a rate of the 3.6%·year–1 (1985–1995), and survivors grew more slowly than other species. The most obvious community-level trend at Esther (1985–2000) was an increase in overall tree density with most of this increase due to ingrowth of small trees. The demography of the spruce population at Baldwin suggests that the decline is over for at least this population.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.589
Threshold uncertainty score0.827

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations22
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicForest ecology and managementFrench-language works237,207