Wood density and stocks of coarse woody debris in a northwestern Amazonian landscape
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coarse woody debris (CWD) is a rarely studied component of the carbon cycle. We report the first measurements of both CWD wood density and necromass in humid, lowland northwestern Amazonia, using both line-intersect and plot-based methods. Average CWD densities were not significantly different between clay-rich and white sand unflooded forests, but lower in floodplain forest (p ≤ 0.001). Necromass of CWD lying on the ground was also lower in the floodplain (10.3 ± 6.1 Mg·ha–1, mean ± 1 SE) than in the clay-rich (30.9 ± 5.4) and white sand (45.8 ± 7.3) forests (p ≤ 0.001, using the line-intersect method). These patterns are likely driven by disturbance history, species composition, and decomposition rates. Plot-based data showed that standing and fallen CWD together accounted for 6.4%–15.4% of total coarse aboveground vegetative mass (trees ≥10 cm diameter). Across humid, lowland neotropical forests, we show that wood densities of intact and partially decayed CWD are significantly related with live wood density at the same site (p = 0.026 and 0.003, respectively). We show that these relationships can be applied generally to estimate CWD wood density for humid, lowland neotropical forests wherever destructive sampling is not possible.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".