Rapid Lateglacial tree population dynamics and ecosystem changes in the eastern Baltic region
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A growing body of evidence implies that the concept of 'treeless tundra' in eastern and northern Europe fails to explain the rapidity of Lateglacial and postglacial tree population dynamics of the region, yet the knowledge of the geographic locations and shifting of tree populations is fragmentary. Pollen, stomata and plant macrofossil stratigraphies from Lake Kurjanovas in the poorly studied eastern Baltic region provide improved knowledge of ranges of north‐eastern European trees during the Lateglacial and subsequent plant population responses to the abrupt climatic changes of the Lateglacial/Holocene transition. The results prove the Lateglacial presence of tree populations (Betula, Pinus and Picea) in the eastern Baltic region. Particularly relevant is the stomatal and plant macrofossil evidence showing the local presence of reproductive Picea populations during the Younger Dryas stadial at 12 900–11 700 cal. a BP, occurring along with Dryas octopetala and arctic herbs, indicating semi‐open vegetation. The spread of Pinus–Betula forest at ca. 14 400 cal. a BP, the rise of Picea at ca. 12 800 cal. a BP and the re‐establishment of Pinus–Betula forest at ca. 11 700 cal. a BP within a span of centuries further suggest strikingly rapid, climate‐driven ecosystem changes rather than gradual plant succession on a newly deglaciated land. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".