MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108519754 · doi:10.1139/x01-126

Forest soil characteristics in a chronosequence of harvested Douglas-fir forests

2001· article· en· W2108519754 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Robert P. Griffiths, Alan Swanson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Bureau of Land ManagementNational Science Foundation
KeywordsChronosequenceEnvironmental scienceLitterTransectSoil respirationForest floorForestrySoil waterClearcuttingExperimental forestEcologyAgronomySoil scienceBiologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study was designed to measure the microbiological and chemical characteristics of forest soils in a chronosequence of harvested Douglas-fir (Pseusotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco) stands in different climatic settings. Mineral soil samples were collected along transects running from old-growth (OG) forests into harvested stands of ages 5, 15, and 40 years (5YS, 15YS, and 40YS, respectively) in the H.J. Andrews Experimental Forest in the central Oregon Cascade Mountains. We took litter depth measurements and cores to test for the presence of mycorrhizal mats at each sampling location. Denitrification potential was significantly lower in OG than in 5YS, and litter depth, forest floor respiration rate, and concentration of ectomycorrhizal mats were significantly greater in OG than in 5YS. Values were intermediate in 15YS and similar to those measured in OG in 40YS. No significant stand-age differences occurred in soil organic matter, soil moisture, pH, mineralizable N, laboratory soil respiration rate, or extractable ammonium. Sample variability was generally lowest in OG forests and highest in 5YS, and no consistent autocorrelations were observed for any of the variables at lags of 5 m or greater. We found no second-level interactions between stand age and location in ANOVA analyses, suggesting that, within the limits of this study, climate did not influence soil response to disturbance and subsequent recovery; however, several soil properties were affected by site location and, therefore, climate.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.067
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations48
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicForest Ecology and Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207