Post-harvest seedling recruitment following mountain pine beetle infestation of Colorado lodgepole pine stands: a comparison using historic survey records
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The extent and severity of overstory lodgepole pine ( Pinus contorta var. latifolia Engelm. ex Wats.) mortality from mountain pine beetle ( Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins) has created management concerns associated with forest regeneration, wildfire risk, human safety, and scenic, wildlife, and watershed resources in western North America. Owing to the unprecedented nature of the outbreak and associated management in the southern Rocky Mountains, it is unknown if the forests that regenerate after this current period of extensive change will differ from those that regenerated in the past. Here, we compare the density and species composition of post-harvest seedling recruits in pre-outbreak (1980–1996) and outbreak stands (2002–2007). Lodgepole pine accounted for more than 95% of post-harvest seedling recruitment and the density of seedlings colonizing clearcuts was equal during both the pre-outbreak and outbreak periods. Compared with harvested areas, the density of tree regeneration was 75% lower in uncut forests and was more evenly distributed among subalpine fir ( Abies lasiocarpa (Hook.) Nutt.) and lodgepole pine. This comparison provides evidence that the density of seedling recruitment will be at least as high after extensive pine beetle caused mortality as under healthy, pre-outbreak conditions and that the species composition of stands regenerating after this outbreak will differ between treated and untreated areas.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".