Enlargement of canopy gaps associated with a fungal pathogen in Yosemite Valley, California
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The enlargement of 21 canopy gaps associated with the root pathogen Heterobasidion annosum (Fr.:Fr.) Bref. = Fomes annosus (Fr.) Karst.) in the mixed-conifer forest of Yosemite Valley was monitored between 1971 and 1998. Mean expanded gap area was 232 m2(range 38-802 m2) in 1971 and 1455 m2(range 150-4216 m2) in 1998. The pathogen is primarily spread among trees via root contacts; therefore, the spread and impact of H. annosum from the stump(s) where infection originated (gap makers) were characterized by describing the area of potential root contact as a variable-area plot. The potential root contact zone delineated the area that would be encompassed by mortality if all trees potentially in contact with the original gap makers had died. Of the 21 plots, the actual area of tree mortality exceeded the potential root contact zone in only two gaps. Enlargement rates around gap perimeters were uneven, ranging from 0 to 1.33 m/year. Incense-cedars (Calocedrus decurrens (Torr.) Florin) tended to die more slowly than ponderosa pines (Pinus ponderosa Dougl.), often 10-30 years after adjacent pines had died. Gap enlargement was not dependent on host density, basal area, or gap-maker diameter, and tended to stabilize over time, probably because of fungal competition in root wood and lack of sufficient suitable host material along gap margins.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".