MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132985565 · doi:10.1139/x07-064

Historical range of variability in live and dead wood biomass: a regional-scale simulation study

2007· article· en· W2132985565 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Etsuko Nonaka, Thomas A. Spies, Michael C. Wimberly, Janet L. Ohmann

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPacific Northwest Research StationU.S. Forest ServiceUniversity of OregonOregon State University
KeywordsBiomass (ecology)Disturbance (geology)Dead woodRange (aeronautics)Environmental scienceEcologyEcosystemHabitatTemporal scalesForest ecologyForest managementGeographyPhysical geographyAgroforestryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The historical range of variability (HRV) in landscape structure and composition created by natural disturbance can serve as a general guide for evaluating ecological conditions of managed landscapes. HRV approaches to evaluating landscapes have been based on age-classes or developmental stages, which may obscure variation in live and dead stand structure. Developing the HRV of stand structural characteristics would improve the ecological resolution of this coarse-filter approach to ecosystem assessment. We investigated HRV in live and dead wood biomass in the regional landscape of the Oregon Coast Range by integrating stand-level biomass models and a spatially explicit fire simulation model. We simulated historical landscapes of the region for 1000 years under pre-Euro-American settlement fire regimes and calculated biomass as a function of disturbance history. The simulation showed that live and dead wood biomass historically varied widely in time and space. The majority of the forests historically contained 500–700 Mg·ha–1 (50–70 kg·m–2) of live wood and 50–200 Mg·ha–1 (5–20 kg·m–2) of dead wood. The current distributions are more concentrated in much smaller amounts for both biomass types. Although restoring the HRV of forest structure is not necessarily a management goal for most landowners and managing agencies, departure from the reference condition can provide relative measure to evaluate habitat conditions for managers seeking to use forest structure as a means to maintain or restore ecosystem and species diversity.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.940
Threshold uncertainty score0.119

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations13
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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