Northernmost North American <i>Pinus contorta</i> var. <i>latifolia</i> (lodgepole pine) sociations and vegetation diversity relative to its central range east of the Rocky Mountains
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lodgepole pine ( Pinus contorta var. latifolia ) stands were sampled in central Yukon, Canada (61.5–64°N latitude), which represented the northernmost 9% of the tree's North American range. Within this area, lodgepole pine occupied only ˜ 2% of the landscape. This study determined: 1) what forest sociations occurred (i.e. structural dominance‐types); 2) how plant growth form composition and richness differed from the central portion of the species’ geographical range; and 3) if stands were biased towards occurring on more thermally favorable south‐facing slopes. Five lodgepole pine sociations were recognized among 100 relevés: Rhododendron groenlandicum (Labrador tea); Cladonia arbuscula (green reindeer lichen); Calamagrostis purpurascens (purple reedgrass); Hylocomium splendens (stairstep moss) and Alnus viridis (green alder, n = 4 relevés). Rhododendron stands were proportionally more common on low gradient sites and had more total plant cover than the other sociations. Cladonia and Calamagrostis stands were typically associated with dry coarse‐textured soils and warm dry sites, respectively; whereas the composition of the Hylocomium sociation reflected the detrimental influences of atypically dense forest canopies on understory vascular plants. Only the Calamagrostis sociation was unique to the study region. Species richness among common northern lodgepole pine sociations averaged 16–19 taxa per relevé (p > 0.05). Northern compared to central range (n = 1394) relevés were compositionally different based on little overlap of their datasets in the ordination space. Northern vegetation had less (p < 0.001) total plant (129% vs 184%), deciduous shrub (9% vs 26%), broad‐leaved herb (5% vs 25%), and bryophyte (27% vs 54%) cover; had greater macro‐lichen cover (13% vs 5%) and lower floristic richness (11 vs 24 taxa) and was less than half as phytosociological diverse. Lodgepole pine stands in the northernmost portion of their range were not biased towards occurring on south‐facing slopes, which suggested an ecological potential for range expansion.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".