Regeneration and stand development following a spruce budworm outbreak, spruce budworm inspired harvest, and salvage harvest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spruce budworm ( Choristoneura fumiferana (Clemens)) (SBW) outbreaks are a major disturbance that influence stand dynamics and succession in balsam fir ( Abies balsamea (L.) Mill.) dominated forests of eastern Canada. We used stand and regeneration data collected from five plots in each of one immature and five mature stands before, during, and 30 years following the last major SBW outbreak in the Cape Breton Highlands to examine the role of stand and regeneration characteristics in shaping future stand development. Comparisons were also made between regeneration in four SBW outbreak stands versus two SBW salvage stands, with and without a subsequent precommercial thinning, and with 25 plots that underwent SBW emulation harvest. In mature unharvested balsam fir stands, species composition 30 years following the SBW outbreak was closely related to predisturbance species composition, and in immature fir stands, hardwood composition increased from 0% to 4%–27%. Species composition in harvested stands varied depending on whether intolerant hardwoods had been precommercially thinned, where thinned stands had 30% less hardwood 30 years postdisturbance than unthinned stands. Seedling density decreased by 17%–85% from 1979 to 1989 in all SBW outbreak stands, but average seedling height increased by 17%–500% as live canopy cover decreased from an average of 50% to 4%. Results suggest that advanced regeneration should be protected during harvest of balsam fir dominated stands, post-outbreak precommercial thinning will increase tree growth, and live tree retention can help develop late-seral structural characteristics in second-growth stands.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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 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".