Laboratory assessment of the effect of forest floor ash on conifer germination
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mineral soils exposed by fire are often covered by a layer of ash due to complete consumption of the forest floor (litter and duff). To assess the possible effects of ash on seed germination and viability of jack pine ( Pinus banksiana Lamb.), black spruce ( Picea mariana (Mill.) Britton, Sterns, Poggenb.), white spruce ( Picea glauca (Moench) Voss), and balsam fir ( Abies balsamea (L.) Mill.), a laboratory experiment was conducted using ash derived from three types of forest floor samples. The samples represented areas of high conifer concentration, high aspen concentration, and mixed aspen and conifer and were collected from five mature aspen ( Populus tremuloides Michx.) – conifer mixedwood stands in southeastern Manitoba. Ash derived from each forest floor type neither prohibited nor delayed conifer germination, except that of balsam fir. Balsam fir had significantly less germination on ash derived from forest floor samples with high aspen concentration. When corrected for seed viability, balsam fir had significantly less germination on all three ash types compared with jack pine, black spruce, and white spruce. However, the impact of ash on balsam fir is unlikely to have meaningful ecological implications, as balsam fir is a climax species and will establish in undisturbed mature forests.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".