Change from pre-settlement to present-day forest composition reconstructed from early land survey records in eastern Québec, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Questions: What was the tree species composition of forests prior to European settlement at the northern hardwood range limit in eastern Québec, Canada? What role did human activities play in the changes in forest composition in this region? Location: Northern range limit of northern hardwoods in the Lower St. Lawrence region of eastern Québec, Canada. Methods: We used early land survey records (1846–1949) of public lands to reconstruct pre-settlement forest composition. The data consist of ranked tree species enumerations at points or for segments along surveyed lines, with enumerations of forest cover types and notes concerning disturbances. An original procedure was developed to weigh and combine these differing data types (line versus point observations; taxa versus cover enumerations). Change to present-day forest composition was evaluated by comparing survey records with forest decadal surveys conducted by the government of Québec over the last 30 years (1980–2009). Results: Pre-settlement dominance of conifers was strong and uniform across the study area, whereas dominance of maple and birches was patchy. Cedar and spruce were less likely to dominate with increasing altitude, whereas maple displayed the reverse trend. Frequency of disturbances, especially logging and fire, increased greatly after 1900. Comparison of survey records and modern plots showed general increases for maple (mentioned frequency increased by 39%), poplar (36%) and paper birch (31%). Considering only taxa ranked first by surveyors, cedar displayed the largest decrease (19%), whereas poplar (15%) and maple (9%) increased significantly. Conclusions: These changes in forest composition can be principally attributed to clear-cutting and colonization fire disturbances throughout the 20th century, and mostly reflected the propensity of taxa to expand (maples/aspen) or decline (cedar/spruce) with increased disturbance frequency. Québec's land survey archives provide an additional data source to reconstruct and validate our knowledge of North America's pre-settlement temperate and sub-boreal forests.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".