Testing forest ecosystem management in boreal mixedwoods of northwestern Quebec: initial response of aspen stands to different levels of harvesting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The SAFE (sylviculture et aménagement forestiers écosystémique) project was set up in 1998 in the Lake Duparquet Research and Teaching Forest to test stand-level silvicultural treatments designed to reflect different aspects of natural forest dynamics. In the winter of 19981999, four levels of forest harvesting, including a no-harvest and a clearcut treatment, were applied to even-aged trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx.) stands according to a complete block design with three replications. Two partial cut treatments removed 33% and 61% of the stand basal area. During the first growing season, harvesting induced a large increase in indigenous understorey biomass that paralleled changes in the canopy opening. Aspen sucker density increased from 4916 stems/ha in the control to 28 751 and 63 333 stems/ha in the one-third and two-thirds harvesting treatments and 102 916 stems/ha in the clearcut. Most changes in nutrient cycling occurred in the second year and included an increase in forest floor organic C, total N, and base cation availability and a decrease in microbial C/N ratio. These changes may have occurred in response to reduced vegetation uptake and woody debris abundance.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".