MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146623995 · doi:10.1139/x06-022

Riparian tree fall directionality and modeling large wood recruitment to streams

2006· article· en· W2146623995 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
D. J. Sobota, Stanley V. Gregory, John Van Sickle

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Council for Air and Stream ImprovementOregon State UniversityU.S. Forest ServiceU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsRiparian zoneSTREAMSDeciduousRiparian forestHydrology (agriculture)Environmental scienceTree (set theory)LandformEcologyPhysical geographyGeologyGeographyHabitatGeomorphologyBiologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Directionality of tree fall in riparian forests can strongly influence predictions of large wood recruitment to streams, yet accuracy of this model parameter has rarely been assessed with field data. We measured fall directions of 1202 riparian trees distributed among 21 stream sites across the Pacific Northwest, USA. Fall directions were oriented towards the stream at 16 sites, upstream at four sites, and not distinguishable from random at one site. Average tree fall direction across sites was correlated with valley constraint (Spearman r = –0.53; p = 0.02), but variability of fall directions was not correlated with this variable. When grouped by species (six conifers and one deciduous), individual trees exhibited stronger tendency to have fallen towards the channel on steep hillslopes (>40%) than on moderately sloped landforms (<40%). Integration of field data into an established recruitment model indicated that 1.5 to 2.4 times more large wood (by number of tree boles) would be recruited to stream reaches with steep hillslopes than to reaches with moderate side slopes or flat banks, if riparian forest conditions are assumed to be constant. We conclude that stream valley topography should be considered in models that use tree fall directions in predictions of large wood recruitment to streams.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.775
Threshold uncertainty score0.954

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.077
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.245 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations25
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicHydrology and Sediment Transport ProcessesFrench-language works237,207