Biodiversity and multiple disturbances: boreal forest ground beetle (Coleoptera: Carabidae) responses to wildfire, harvesting, and herbicide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rising societal demands for forest resources along with existing natural disturbance regimes suggest that sustainable forest management will increasingly depend on better understanding the cumulative effects of natural and anthropogenic disturbances. In North America, for example, there is increasing economic pressure to salvage log burned forests, although the ecological consequences of combining fire and harvesting on the same sites are unclear. We examined the short-term (2 year) responses of boreal forest ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) to the individual and combined effects of wildfire, harvesting, and herbicide. Ground beetle responses to wildfire and forestry-related disturbances differed strongly and suggested that, although some species may appear to benefit from disturbance combinations (e.g., Sericoda quadripunctata (DeGeer)), these effects are detrimental to others (e.g., Sericoda bembidioides Kirby). Species compositional variability was significantly reduced by disturbance combinations suggesting that multiple disturbances may lead to a simplification of this entire assemblage. In addition, ground beetle responses were correlated with changes in several key habitat parameters such as amount of woody debris, exposed ground, and plant species richness suggesting avenues for future study. Overall, however, our results suggest that efforts to avoid compounding disturbances on any site should be considered when developing current and future forest management guidelines.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".