Snow accumulation and ablation in a beetle-killed pine stand in Northern Interior British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This preliminary study examined the impact of mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae) infestation and subsequent canopy mortality on ground snow accumulation and ablation in lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta) stands. During the winter of 2005–2006, meteorological and snow conditions were measured in three stands—dead, alive, and cleared—in Northern Interior British Columbia. Variations in measured snow conditions and meteorological data between stands were assessed. Data were used in an energy-balance model to calculate snow ablation in each stand and estimate effects on meltwater production. Results showed that the dead stand no longer behaved like an alive stand, but had not yet approached cleared stand conditions. Ablation rates in the dead stand remained similar to those in the alive stand, although accumulation was closer to that in the cleared stand. The combination of a low ablation rate and increased ground snow accumulation in the dead stand resulted in a lengthened period of snowpack disappearance. In the cleared stand, however, high ablation rates were sufficient to remove the thicker snowpack earlier than in the dead stand. A multi-year study is under way at a new research site to further quantify the relationship between beetle-kill and its effect on snowpack.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".