Indirect effects of beech bark disease on sugar maple seedling survival
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To investigate the mechanisms of indirect effects of the increased presence of American beech (Fagus grandifolia Ehrh.) saplings on sugar maple (Acer saccharum Marsh.) seedling survival, I conducted several experiments in the area of the Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest in central New Hampshire, U.S.A. To investigate the effects of competition from beech saplings on sugar maple seedlings, a removal experiment was conducted. Sugar maple seedling survival was monitored in five replicate plots of each of the two treatments for 6 years. Survivorship in plots in which beech saplings had been removed was significantly higher (33%) than in control plots (1%). A shading experiment demonstrated that a large proportion of the mortality of sugar maple seedlings results from the effects of shading. Cutting and shade cloth treatments were done in a two-factor factorial block design, and results showed a strong negative effect of shading in the plot. A third experiment investigated the role of soil moisture. Plots that had higher soil moisture and also had beech removed had the highest survival (76%), while control plots in a dry area had the lowest (22%). Overall, the experiments showed that beech bark disease and the associated increase in beech saplings had a negative indirect effect on sugar maple seedling survival. Sugar maple regeneration failure appeared to be, at least in part, due to the indirect effects of beech bark disease.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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 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".