MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Interactions among fire, insects and pathogens in coniferous forests of the interior western United States and Canada

2006· article· en· W2148514932 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
T. Jeffery Parker, Karen M. Clancy, Robert L. Mathiasen

Bibliographic record

VenueAgricultural and Forest Entomology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyEcologyDisturbance (geology)Bark beetleBiodiversityFire protectionEcosystemForest ecologyBark (sound)Agroforestry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract 1 Natural and recurring disturbances caused by fire, native forest insects and pathogens have interacted for millennia to create and maintain forests dominated by seral or pioneering species of conifers in the interior regions of the western United States and Canada. 2 Changes in fire suppression and other factors in the last century have altered the species composition and increased the density of trees in many western forests, leading to concomitant changes in how these three disturbance agents interact. 3 Two‐ and three‐way interactions are reviewed that involve fire, insects and pathogens in these forests, including fire‐induced pathogen infection and insect attack, the effects of tree mortality from insects and diseases on fuel accumulation, and efforts to model these interactions. 4 The emerging concern is highlighted regarding how the amount and distribution of bark beetle‐caused tree mortality will be affected by large‐scale restoration of these fire‐adapted forest ecosystems via prescribed fire. 5 The effects of fire on soil insects and pathogens, and on biodiversity of ground‐dwelling arthropods, are examined. 6 The effects of fire suppression on forest susceptibility to insects and pathogens, are discussed, as is the use of prescribed fire to control forest pests.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.170
Teacher spread0.167 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations285
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgricultural and Forest EntomologySame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207