Snag characteristics and cavity-nesting birds in the unmanaged post-fire northeastern Canadian boreal forest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We studied the availability and characteristics of snags and their use by cavity-nesting birds in the northeastern part of the Canadian boreal forest. We built up two long-term (> 200 years) chronosequences following time since the last fire in the unmanaged boreal forest of northeastern Québec, one in the balsam fir-white birch domain (southern region) and one in the spruce-mosses domain (northern region). We then sampled and characterized snags and live trees in 30 stands from each of these two chronosequences. We also looked for nest cavities on all sampled snags, performed bird inventories by point counts, and calculated tree mortality rate from permanent sample plots. Results show that mortality rates follow a U-shaped pattern, with more snags of large diameter (> 20 cm DBH) in young (< 50 years) and in old (> 200 years) forests. In the latter, we also found more nest cavities than in any other age classes. Although abundance of primary cavity nesters (excavating species) did not vary among age classes, secondary cavity nesters (using cavities already available) tend to be more numerous in older forests. Our results highlight the capacity for young and old-growth forests to provide quality habitat for species that are dependent on large snags. Proper forest management should maintain a mosaic of different age forest stands, including snags, to promote biodiversity and provide important resources for resident bird species.
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 | 0.001 | 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".