Fifty years of forest dynamics following diameter-limit cuttings in balsam fir – yellow birch stands of the Lower St. Lawrence region, Quebec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The long-term effects of high-intensity diameter-limit cuttings conducted in the winter and summer of the 1940s and 1950s on the dynamics of softwood and mixedwood stands in southeastern Quebec were compared. Changes in composition and stand structure over a 50 year period were studied using 18 permanent sample plots located in the Lac-Métis Seigneury observation area measured in 1950, 1960, 1970, and 2003. Winter logging operations were conducted between 1942 and 1949, and summer logging operations were conducted between 1958 and 1960. The interaction between cuttings and the 1950s and 1970s spruce budworm (Choristoneura fumiferana (Clemens)) outbreaks that occurred in the area affected forest dynamics. For the two logging operation types, the most abundant softwood species observed before logging and in 2003 was balsam fir (Abies balsamea (L.) Mill.), whereas white birch (Betula papyrifera Marsh.) and yellow birch (Betula alleghaniensis Britt.) were the most abundant hardwood species. Changes in the overstory composition were more significant in the summer logging operations than in the winter ones. The softwood cover type observed before winter logging was maintained in 2003. Following summer logging, an important increase in the proportion of birch species was observed. The softwood cover type observed before logging had changed to a mixedwood cover type by 2003. Forest dynamics differences between the two types of logging were the result of interactions between the density and composition of advance regeneration, the microsite conditions after logging, and the length and severity of spruce budworm outbreaks.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".