Black spruce growth and survival in boreal open woodlands 10 years following mechanical site preparation and planting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since 1950, the creation of open woodlands has increased in Canada's northeastern continuous boreal forest and recent studies have demonstrated that the mechanisms underlying their creation are similar to those found in the lichen woodland zone. Since no natural re-densification of open woodlands has been observed to date, afforestation is necessary to counteract an increase of these types of stands in the continuous boreal forest. The aim of this study was to test the operational feasibility and success of afforestation efforts in open woodlands, 10 years after planting. The experimental design included different containerized seedling stocks and site preparation approaches, such as patch and disk scarification, and covered most of the geographical range of accessible continuous boreal forest in Québec. In open woodlands, regardless of black spruce stock size, disk scarification increased planted seedling survival and growth compared with patch scarification and direct planting, possibly due to a beneficial effect on seedling nutrition. However, even if seedling growth in open woodlands and feathermoss stands submitted to disk scarification was comparable, growth was higher in the latter stands. Nonetheless, we conclude that disk scarification followed by planting is an appropriate method to afforest boreal open woodlands.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".