MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098291255 · doi:10.1525/bio.2013.63.5.21

Extreme Climate Variability Should Be Considered in Forestry Assisted Migration: A Reply

2013· article· en· W2098291255 on OpenAlex
John Pedlar, Daniel W. McKenney, Isabelle Aubin, Louis R. Iverson, Richard S. Winder, Catherine Ste-Marie, Gregory A. O’Neill

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBioScience · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsMinistry of ForestsNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest Service
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForestryEnvironmental scienceClimate changeClimatologyEcologyPhysical geographyGeographyGeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Responding to our recent article (Pedlar et al. 2012), Benito-Garzon and colleagues point out that extreme climatic events should be taken into account when selecting regenerative material for forestry-related assisted migration (AM) operations. Although technical considerations around seed movements were not the focus of our paper, we concur with their position and welcome the opportunity to expand on this topic. Benito-Garzon and colleagues emphasize the importance of considering extreme minimum temperatures when matching planting material and planting sites under climate change. Drought, heat waves, and spring freeze phenomena (Gu et al. 2008, Reyer et al. 2013) should also be recognized as extreme weather events that potentially play critical roles in determining the outcome of AM efforts. Although Benito-Garzon and colleagues raise the issue of climate extremes in the context of forestry AM, climate extremes are likely to play an important role in other types of AM, as well (e.g., species rescue; Pedlar et al. 2012).

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.096
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.207 · 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