Selective logging: does the imprint remain on tree structure and composition after 45 years?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Selective logging of tropical forests is increasing in extent and intensity. The duration over which impacts of selective logging persist, however, remains an unresolved question, particularly for African forests. Here, we investigate the extent to which a past selective logging event continues to leave its imprint on different components of an East African forest 45 years later. We inventoried 2358 stems ≥10 cm in diameter in 26 plots (200 m × 10 m) within a 5.2 ha area in Kibale National Park, Uganda, in logged and unlogged forest. In these surveys, we characterized the forest light environment, taxonomic composition, functional trait composition using three traits (wood density, maximum height and maximum diameter) and forest structure based on three measures (stem density, total basal area and total above-ground biomass). In comparison to unlogged forests, selectively logged forest plots in Kibale National Park on average had higher light levels, different structure characterized by lower stem density, lower total basal area and lower above-ground biomass, and a distinct taxonomic composition driven primarily by changes in the relative abundance of species. Conversely, selectively logged forest plots were like unlogged plots in functional composition, having similar community-weighted mean values for wood density, maximum height and maximum diameter. This similarity in functional composition irrespective of logging history may be due to functional recovery of logged forest or background changes in functional attributes of unlogged forest. Despite the passage of 45 years, the legacy of selective logging on the tree community in Kibale National Park is still evident, as indicated by distinct taxonomic and structural composition and reduced carbon storage in logged forest compared with unlogged forest. The effects of selective logging are exerted via influences on tree demography rather than functional trait composition.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".