MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031955826 · doi:10.1139/x03-143

Consequences of various landscape-scale ecosystem management strategies and fire cycles on age-class structure and harvest in boreal forests

2004· article· en· W2031955826 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Andrew Fall, Marie‐Josée Fortin, Daniel Kneeshaw, Stephen H Yamasaki, Christian Messier, Luc Bouthillier, C. Smyth

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalUniversity of TorontoMinistère des Ressources naturelles et des ForêtsUniversity of VictoriaSimon Fraser UniversityUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSimon Fraser University
KeywordsDisturbance (geology)Environmental resource managementTaigaForest managementEnvironmental scienceHabitatSeral communityGeographyBiodiversityBorealScale (ratio)EcologyAgroforestryForestryCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At the landscape scale, one of the key indicators of sustainable forest management is the age-class distribution of stands, since it provides a coarse synopsis of habitat potential, structural complexity, and stand volume, and it is directly modified by timber extraction and wildfire. To explore the consequences of several landscape-scale boreal forest management strategies on age-class structure in the Mauricie region of Quebec, we used spatially explicit simulation modelling. Our study investigated three different harvesting strategies (the one currently practiced and two different strategies to maintain late seral stands) and interactions between fire and harvesting on stand age-class distribution. We found that the legacy of initial forested age structure and its spatial configuration can pose short- (<50 years) to medium-term (150–300 years) challenges to balancing wood supply and ecological objectives. Also, ongoing disturbance by fire, even at relatively long cycles in relation to historic levels, can further constrain the achievement of both timber and biodiversity goals. For example, when fire was combined with management, harvest shortfalls occurred in all scenarios with a fire cycle of 100 years and most scenarios with a fire cycle of 150 years. Even a fire cycle of 500 years led to a reduction in older forest when its maintenance was not a primary constraint. Our results highlight the need to consider the broad-scale effects of natural disturbance when developing ecosystem management policies and the importance of prioritizing objectives when planning for multiple resource use.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.834
Threshold uncertainty score0.943

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations71
Published2004
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207