Fire disturbance of larch woodlands in string fens in northern Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, dendrochronology was used to reconstruct the fire history and associated dynamics of the last 350 years in three larch (Larix laricina [Du Roi] K. Koch) woodlands in string fens of the northern boreal forest of Quebec. Fire scars were also sampled to reconstruct the fire history across the surrounding uplands. Our results show that string fens are more likely to experience partial disturbance than complete removal of the tree cover during fire. Although large fires burned across the studied landscape in 1733, 1787, 1865, and 1941, no stand-replacing fire has occurred in any of the studied woodlands. At all sites, the oldest larch trees became established around 16401680, and several individuals survived each fire identified across the uplands. However, partial disturbance during the most recent 1941 fire, which was associated with severe fire weather, decreased tree density and released the growth of several trees. Although signs of previous fire may have been lost through wood decay, no fire impacted larch growth as severely as the 1941 fire, further emphasizing the modest influence of fire in string fens as compared with uplands. The low fire influence in these minerotrophic peatlands helps explain the high occurrence of the fire-sensitive eastern larch.Key words: boreal forest, fire disturbance, larch woodland, Larix laricina, northern Quebec, string fen.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".