Mixed-severity fire regimes in dry forests of southern interior British Columbia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Historical fire severity is poorly characterized for dry forests in the interior west of North America. We inferred a multicentury history of fire severity from tree rings in Douglas-fir ( Pseudotsuga menziesii var. glauca (Beissn.) Franco) – ponderosa pine ( Pinus ponderosa Douglas ex P. Lawson & C. Lawson) forests in the southern interior of British Columbia, Canada. In 2 ha plots distributed systematically over 1105 ha, we determined the dates of fire scars, indicators of low-severity fire, from 125 trees and inferred dates of even-aged cohorts, potential indicators of high-severity fire, from establishment dates of 1270 trees. Most (76%) of the 41 plots contained fire-scarred trees with a mean plot-composite fire scar interval of 21 years (1700–1900). Most (76%) also contained one or two cohorts. At the plot scale, we inferred that the fire regime at most plots was of mixed severity through time (66%) and at the remaining plots of low (20%), high (10%), or unknown (4%) severity through time. We suggest that across our study area, the fire regime was mixed severity over the past several centuries, with low-severity fires most common and often extensive but small, high-severity disturbances also occasionally occurred. Our results present strong evidence for the importance of mixed-severity fire regimes in which low-severity fires dominate in interior Douglas-fir – ponderosa pine forests in western Canada.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 teacher head, 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".