Comparison of coniferous forest carbon stocks between old-growth and young second-growth forests on two soil types in central British Columbia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Carbon (C) stocks were assessed for hybrid interior spruce (Picea glauca (Moench) Voss × Picea engelmannii Parry ex Engelm.)-dominated upland forests within the Aleza Lake Research Forest in central British Columbia, Canada. Four old-growth (141250 years old) and four young second-growth (<20 years old) forest plots were established on the two dominant soil texture types, coarse and fine, for a total of 16 plots. Mean total C stocks for old-growth stands ranged from 423 Mg C·ha1 (coarse) to 324 Mg C·ha1 (fine), intermediate between Pacific Northwest temperate forests and upland boreal forests. Total C was lower in second-growth stands because of lower tree (mostly large tree stem), forest floor, and woody debris C stocks. In contrast, old-growth forest-floor C stocks ranged from 78 Mg C·ha1 (coarse) to 35 Mg C·ha1 (fine), 2.9- and 1.2-fold higher than in corresponding second-growth stands, respectively. Woody debris C stocks in old-growth stands totaled 35 Mg C·ha1 (coarse) and 31 Mg C·ha1 (fine), 2.7- and 3.4-fold higher than in second-growth stands, respectively. Mineral soil C to 1.07 m depth was similar across soil type and age-class, with totals ranging from 115 to 106 Mg C·ha1. Harvesting of old-growth forests in sub-boreal British Columbia lowers total C stocks by 54%41%.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".