MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088468288 · doi:10.1139/f00-106

Impacts of intensive harvesting on hydrology and nutrient dynamics of northern hardwood forests

2000· article· en· W2088468288 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
C. Wayne Martin, James W. Hornbeck, Gene E. Likens, Donald C. Buso

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAndrew W. Mellon FoundationU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceHydrology (agriculture)InterceptionSTREAMSExperimental forestHardwoodNutrientGrowing seasonClearcuttingEcologyTranspirationVegetation (pathology)LoggingHabitatChronosequenceBiologyGeologySoil waterSoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Whole-tree clear-cutting and progressive strip-cutting of northern hardwood forests at the Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest in central New Hampshire resulted in measurable changes in physical and chemical conditions of forest streams. As a result of reduced transpiration and interception, water yield for the first year after whole-tree harvesting increased by >150 mm, the majority of which occurred during the growing season. Peak flows increased only moderately. Water yield and peak flow increases disappeared within 4-6 years as a result of rapidly regrowing vegetation. Sediment yields increased during and after harvesting but can be maintained within normal ranges of reference streams by careful use of best management practices. Stream chemistry changes occurred immediately following harvesting, most notably in the form of increases in concentrations of Ca2+, K+, NO3-, and H+. The concentrations return close to preharvest levels within 3-5 years. The above changes are discussed in terms of their causes and implications for aquatic habitat and fisheries.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.171
Threshold uncertainty score0.341

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations127
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicHydrology and Sediment Transport ProcessesFrench-language works237,207