MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2079390251 · doi:10.1139/x10-105

Acer saccharum response to concurrent disturbances: the importance of stem layering as an adaptive trait

2010· article· en· W2079390251 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Stacie A. Holmes, Christopher R. Webster

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMichigan Technological University
KeywordsCanopyLayeringBiologyShade toleranceSaccharumSilvicultureHerbivoreEcological successionTraitRange (aeronautics)EcologyDisturbance (geology)Botany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For shade-tolerant saplings persisting under heavy forest shade, the probability of release by disturbance is directly related to longevity. We examined the effects of two concurrent disturbances, overstory removal and herbivory, on the regeneration dynamics and release response of Acer saccharum Marsh. within 20 artificial canopy gaps ranging in size from 50 to 450 m2. To examine the influence of herbivory, we constructed arrays of deer exclosures within each canopy gap. Five years after gap creation, A. saccharum dominated the taller sapling classes across the entire range of gap sizes examined, and evidence of stem layering in this species was common across all treatments (52%), especially in taller saplings. The presence of stem layering was significantly associated with greater postdisturbance height growth (P < 0.001), regardless of gap area or herbivory. The increase in height of layered A. saccharum on control plots was in spite of the fact that 70% of these saplings were browsed at least once following gap creation; compared with 46% of nonlayered individuals. Consequently, our results suggest that stem layering likely fosters resilience in the face of complex or interacting disturbances and may be an important trait for forecasting gap capture and succession.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.998
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations10
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest Research→Same topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies→French-language works237,207→