Short-term population dynamics of <i>Glaucomys sabrinus</i> and <i>Tamiasciurus douglasii</i> in commercially thinned and unthinned stands of coastal coniferous forest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Population dynamics of Glaucomys sabrinus (Shaw) and Tamiasciurus douglasii (Audubon and Bachman) were examined in commercially thinned and unthinned stands in British Columbia, Canada. We tested the hypothesis that commercial thinning would have negative short-term effects on the population dynamics of these species. Populations were monitored using markrecapture techniques in two commercially thinned and two unthinned stands dominated by 60- to 70-year-old western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla (Raf.) Sarg.) and western redcedar (Thuja plicata Donn. ex D. Don). Populations were sampled intensively from August 1995 to May 1999 at Chehalis Lake and from May 1997 to March 2000 in the Malcolm Knapp Research Forest (MKRF). There were no differences among stands thinned and unthinned in movement, abundance, recruitment, survival, duration individuals remained in stands, percentage of males breeding, and mass of males for G. sabrinus or T. douglasii. Mean density of G. sabrinus in thinned and unthinned stands were 0.65 and 0.89 individuals/ha, respectively, at Chehalis and 0.09 and 0.51 individuals/ha, respectively, at MKRF. Mean density of T. douglasii in thinned and unthinned stands were 1.18 and 0.87 individuals/ha, respectively, at Chehalis and 1.08 and 1.00 individuals/ha, respectively, at MKRF. We concluded that commercial thinning had no negative short-term effects on the population dynamics of these species.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".