The influence of decomposing logs on soil biology and nutrient cycling in an old-growth mixed coniferous forest in Oregon, U.S.A.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the effect of coarse woody debris (CWD) on mineral soils at the H.J. Andrews Experimental Forest in the central Cascade Range of Oregon, U.S.A. Nutrients in CWD leachates were compared with (i) forest floor (control) leachates, (ii) over a decay chronosequence, and (iii) among CWD of four species. There were few differences among CWD leachates and forest floor leachates. Soils under CWD were warmer but not wetter than control soils. Water-soluble organic carbon was higher in soils under CWD than in controls at 515 cm depth (p < 0.02), but soil C concentrations did not differ. Gross N mineralization was faster in control soils. We found no differences in N, P, microbial biomass, Biolog plate assays, or enzyme activity in soils. Nutrient leachate differences among CWD species were small. Differences in solutions and in soils among CWD and controls were largest during the middle decay classes. This study suggests that either (i) CWD has no long-term effect and does not contribute large amounts of organic matter to the soil profile or (ii) the effect of CWD is so prolonged that no spatial affect is noticeable because all soils have been affected by CWD at some time.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".