MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123631806 · doi:10.1002/jqs.1492

Long‐term spruce budworm outbreak dynamics reconstructed from subfossil trees

2011· article· en· W2123631806 on OpenAlexaffabout
Hubert Morin, Cornélia Krause

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Quaternary Science · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubfossilSpruce budwormChoristoneura fumiferanaRadiocarbon datingTaigaBorealChronologyGeographyForestryEcologyDendrochronologyGeologyPhysical geographyHoloceneArchaeologyPaleontologyBiologyTortricidaeLepidoptera genitalia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We reconstructed the long‐term spruce budworm (SBW) (Choristoneura fumiferanaClem.) outbreak dynamics in the boreal forest of Quebec (Canada) using a dendrochronological approach with subfossil trees. Although the majority of the excavated wood belonging to the genusPiceacould potentially reveal the past activity of spruce budworms in the tree rings, very few were cross‐dated due to a lack of marker rings. All cross‐dated trees were found within a particular zone of the peat bogs and the floating chronology was radiocarbon dated toca.5.1 cal ka BP. The results presented in this study suggest that the dynamics of SBW outbreaks in the studied area fluctuated during the last millennia and that severe outbreaks as observed during the 20th century seldom occurred in that part of the boreal forest since the end of the last glaciation. These results are in agreement with observations from other parts of eastern North America. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 score0.410
Threshold uncertainty score0.816

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations23
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Quaternary ScienceSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207