MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

STRUCTURE AND COMPOSITION OF RIPARIAN BOREAL FOREST: NEW METHODS FOR ANALYZING EDGE INFLUENCE

2001· article· en· W2044245034 on OpenAlexaff
Karen A. Harper, S. Ellen Macdonald

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransectEcotoneTaigaGradient analysisUnderstoryEnvironmental scienceBorealEcologyRiparian forestRiparian zoneCanopyGeographyForestryOrdinationHabitatBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Riparian ecotones at lakeshore edges are prominent features on the heterogeneous boreal forest landscape. We introduce a new method (the critical values approach), which incorporates inherent variability in interior forest, to quantify distance of edge influence at lakeshore forest edges. We use this method to examine the variation in forest structure and composition along the lakeshore forest edge-to-interior gradient in the mixedwood boreal forest. Our objectives were: (1) to quantify distance of edge influence for forest structure and composition at lakeshore forest edges; and (2) to investigate spatial pattern in vegetation along the edge-to-interior gradient. Trees, coarse woody material, saplings, shrubs, and herbs were sampled in plots at varying distances along 200-m transects established perpendicular to lakeshore forest edges. Distance of edge influence was determined by comparing mean values at different positions along the transect to critical values established from a randomization test of interior forest data. The spatial pattern of four selected species along the edge-to-interior gradient was assessed using split moving window analysis and wavelet analysis. The results suggest that a distinct lakeshore forest edge community exists. This community was ∼40 m wide and was characterized by greater structural diversity, larger amounts of coarse woody material, and more saplings and mid-canopy trees than interior forest. Distance of edge influence for understory composition was generally greater than for forest structure. Patterns of response for different species along the edge-to-interior gradient were related to shade tolerance. Lakeshore forest edges are distinct landscape elements, but their prominence depends on the reference forest, species, and scale.

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)0.000
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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.305

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations150
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcologySame topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207