MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035307198 · doi:10.1139/x10-207

The effect of tree dimension on the diversity of bark microhabitat structures and bark use in Douglas-fir (<i>Pseudotsuga menziesii</i> var. <i>menziesii</i>)

2011· article· en· W2035307198 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Alexa K. Michel, Susanne Winter, Andreas Linde

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBark (sound)Coarse woody debrisHabitatBiologyEcologyVegetation (pathology)Botany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The focus of this study was to investigate the role of tree dimension and associated bark structures for high structural complexity and high natural biodiversity in forest ecosystems. Two-hundred and ninety-one Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii var. menziesii (Mirbel) Franco) trees in two regions of the US Pacific Northwest were investigated for the relationship between tree diameter and bark thickness (measured as bark fissure depth) and the relationships of both to bark microhabitats and signs of bark use. Our results emphasize the habitat function of tree bark of large-diameter Douglas-fir trees. Many bark microhabitat types and their total abundance significantly increased with increasing tree diameter and bark thickness. These were bark pockets with and without decaying substrate, bowls in the bark, and signs of bark use, e.g., small holes from woodpecker drillings and large insects, large bark excavations from woodpeckers, spider funnel webs, natural cavities at the stem base without decay, and the occurrence of herb vegetation at the tree base. In forest monitoring, tree diameter may be a good indicator of the number of bark microhabitats and of bark thickness because it is strongly related to both of these variables. However, because of the high variability of bark thickness in large-diameter trees, we suggest monitoring bark fissure depth if an ecological evaluation of Douglas-fir forests is needed.

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)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations41
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicForest Ecology and Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207