The Role of Aggregated Forest Harvest Residue in Soil Fertility, Plant Growth, and Pollination Services
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While post‐harvest residue (“slash”) is increasingly viewed as a source of biofuel, few studies have considered the potential ecological impact of the spatial distribution of forest harvest residue. We hypothesized that slash piles create islands of high soil fertility and light, leading to greater abundance, growth, and reproduction of plants. In 6‐yr‐old intensively managed hybrid poplar ( Populus balsamifera L. × P. maximowiczii A. Henry) plantations, we showed that soluble organic N, NO 3 –N, NH 4 –N, and P decreased as a negative exponential function with distance from the pile. Pin cherry ( Prunus pensylvanica L. f.) relative growth rate was fastest near piles in the first few years after harvest. We found significantly greater stem size, flowers per plant, and foliar P near piles for cherry, and this inverse gradient sharpened in a 16‐yr‐old white spruce [ Picea glauca (Moench) Voss] plantation. For the two other flowering species, strawberry ( Fragaria virginiana Mill.) and raspberry ( Rubus idaeus L.), flower and fruit abundance were also significantly and strongly negatively correlated with distance to the pile. Further, directly correlating soil nutrient availability with plant traits, we found significant positive relationships between plant growth, reproductive output, and N availability. Partial correlation analysis indicated that more of the variance in plant traits was explained by distance than by soil nutrition. We conclude that in industrial forests, piles replace canopy gaps as sites where understory plant species can episodically reproduce and are therefore important for many plant species as well as the pollinators and frugivores dependent on them.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".