MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123180542 · doi:10.1890/08-1463.1

High levels of green‐tree retention are required to preserve ground beetle biodiversity in boreal mixedwood forests

2010· article· en· W2123180542 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueEcological Applications · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaCanadian Forest ServiceUniversité du QuébecUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaForest Resource Improvement Association of Alberta
KeywordsBiodiversityClearcuttingBorealTaigaDeciduousEcologyEnvironmental scienceDisturbance (geology)EcosystemGround beetleBiotaHabitatBiologyAgroforestry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recovery of biodiversity and other ecosystem functions to pre-disturbance levels is a central goal of natural disturbance-based approaches to ecosystem management. In boreal mixedwood forests, green-tree retention has been proposed as an alternative approach to traditional clearcutting that may minimize initial displacement of species assemblages and speed recovery of the biota. Here we evaluated the effectiveness of six levels of dispersed greentree retention for conservation of ground beetle biodiversity in four boreal mixedwood cover types that span a gradient of stand development following wildfire. Each cover type X treatment combination was replicated three times in an operational scale experiment using 10-ha compartments. Ground beetle assemblages (59 species and 45 419 individuals) responded to increasing levels of dispersed, green-tree retention, but even relatively high levels of retention (up to 50% retention) did not retain species assemblages characteristic of uncut forest stands. This latter effect was most pronounced in compartments in later successional stages; i.e., those with developing conifer understories, or mixed and/or conifer-dominated overstories. Beetle assemblages in high levels of retention (50-75%) were statistically similar across all cover types, although we detected modest differences among the 5-year recovery of assemblages, based on initial cover type differences. Thus, recovery to initial conditions likely will be slower in mixed and conifer stands than in deciduous stands. We suggest that recovery of beetle assemblages is strongly linked to stand reinitiation through deciduous "suckering" post-harvest. Increasing levels of harvest appear to homogenize carabid assemblages across the four dominant cover types, and thus higher levels of retention (>50%) will be required to preserve assemblages of later successional stages. Regional renewal of assemblages, however, will require landscape-level planning.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.909

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.190 · 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