Decomposition of green foliage in eastern hemlock forests of southern New England impacted by hemlock woolly adelgid infestations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the impacts of hemlock woolly adelgid (Adelges tsugae Annand) (HWA), a small, invasive insect, on foliar chemistry, forest floor microclimate, and subsequent green foliage decomposition in eastern hemlock (Tsuga canadensis (L.) Carrière) forests. We investigated the direct effects of HWA feeding and indirect changes in microclimate on foliar decomposition by incubating HWA-infested and uninfested foliage across eight eastern hemlock dominated stands in southern New England that had different histories of HWA infestation. Infested stands had much poorer average crown health (3.4 versus 1.4 crown loss ratings), higher percent open sky (10.9 ± 2.4 vs. 5.3 ± 0.5 gap light index), and lower organic soil moisture (0.83 ± 0.02 g·g1 vs. 1.06 ± 0.05 g·g1) than uninfested stands. There were no significant differences in percent C, percent N, or percent lignin for the excised foliage at the start of the study. However, after 120 days, decomposing foliage from infested trees had significantly higher N concentrations (1.83% ± 0.05% vs. 1.69% ± 0.02 %) and lower C/N ratios (29.9 ± 0.8 vs. 31.6 ± 0.2) than uninfested foliage, suggesting that HWA herbivory resulted in alterations of litter chemistry as decomposition progressed. Mass loss of common uninfested foliage was lower in uninfested hemlock stands than in infested ones (30.9% ± 0.7% vs. 34.2% ± 0.1%). These rates of mass loss were significantly correlated with microclimate factors and indicate that organic soil moisture levels are controlling decomposition in HWA-infested forests. Infestation by HWA causes virtually no direct feeding damage to foliage, but it does lead to several indirect and significant ecological and functional changes over the 10- to 20-year course of infestation and stand decline.
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".