MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035998742 · doi:10.1139/x05-203

Characterizing flow regimes for floodplain forest conservation: an assessment of factors affecting sapling growth and survivorship on three cold desert rivers

2005· article· en· W2035998742 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Douglas C. Andersen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBureau of ReclamationU.S. Geological SurveyColorado State University
KeywordsSurvivorship curveFloodplainEnvironmental sciencePrecipitationFlood mythContext (archaeology)EcologyHydrology (agriculture)BiologyGeographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I analyzed annual height growth and survivorship of Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii S. Watson) saplings on three floodplains in Colorado and Utah to assess responses to interannual variation in flow regime and summer precipitation. Mammal exclosures, supplemented with an insecticide treatment at one site, were used to assess flow regime – herbivore interactions. Multiple regression analyses on data collected over 7–11 years indicated that growth of continuously injury-free saplings was positively related to either peak discharge or the maximum 30-day discharge but was not related to interannual decline in the late-summer river stage (ΔW MIN ) or precipitation. Growth was fastest where ΔW MIN was smallest and depth to the late-summer water table moderate (≤1.5 m). Survivorship increased with ΔW MIN where the water table was at shallow depths. Herbivory reduced long-term height growth and survivorship by up to 60% and 50%, respectively. The results support the concept that flow history and environmental context determine whether a particular flow will have a net positive or negative influence on growth and survivorship and suggest that the flow regime that best promotes sapling growth and survival along managed rivers features a short spring flood pulse and constant base flow, with no interannual variation in the hydrograph. Because environmental contexts vary, interannual variation may be necessary for best overall stand performance.

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)0.002
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 score0.503
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations19
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicHydrology and Sediment Transport ProcessesFrench-language works237,207