Canopy and emergent white spruce in “pure” broadleaf stands: frequency, predictive models, and ecological importance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In mixedwood boreal forests of western Canada, stands classified as “pure deciduous” by forest inventories sometimes contain a few large white spruce (Picea glauca (Moench) Voss) trees among or emerging from the canopy. These trees are important as regeneration seed sources and for habitat structure. Neither their abundance nor the characteristics of stands in which they occur have previously been quantified. Of 275 “pure aspen” stands in northeastern Alberta, 19.6% contained at least one such spruce detectable in an aerial photograph. These trees were found in stands across the range of sampled canopy heights, densities, age classes, and stand sizes and were often present in the interior of stands, not just on the perimeter. The frequency of 3 ha cells containing at least one spruce was related to (i) stand shape and size, (ii) amount of mature white spruce in adjacent forest, (iii) canopy height, (iv) stand age, and (v) stand density. We conclude that such trees are relatively abundant and widely distributed within the boreal mixedwood forests of Alberta. There is presently no provision to maintain this landscape element within managed forests. More information is needed to determine if or how they should be considered in forest management planning.
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 | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".