MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161140941 · doi:10.1093/forestry/cpi024

Impact of riparian buffer guidelines on old growth in western boreal forests of Canada

2005· article· en· W2161140941 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Philip Lee, Tim Barker

Bibliographic record

VenueForestry An International Journal of Forest Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAlberta Conservation Association
KeywordsRiparian zoneTaigaDeciduousRiparian forestRiparian bufferBorealEnvironmental scienceElevation (ballistics)STREAMSGeographyForestryWildlifeForest managementGrowth modelOld-growth forestHydrology (agriculture)EcologyPhysical geographyBiologyGeologyMathematicsArchaeologyHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As timber harvest expands over a previously unharvested landbase, riparian buffers will make up an increasing proportion of old-growth forests. This study examined the impact of different criteria for the formulation of riparian buffers on the temporal supply of old-growth forests in western boreal Canada. Three common criteria were applied through computer simulation over an ∼313 000-ha timber merchantable landbase for a 200-year time horizon. Guideline criteria included: (1) broad prescriptive approach, i.e. few-sizes-fit-all; (2) special management of fish-bearing streams; and (3) two-zone, partial harvest buffers. While the numerical results are specific to this study area, they suggested five general results applicable to forest planning. (1) Regardless of the criteria for buffers, old growth accumulated over the first 40–60 years thereafter it dropped to 2–4 per cent of the total landbase after 100 years. (2) Guidelines recognizing fish-bearing water bodies retained more old growth, particularly conifer, because of their application to higher elevation and more intermittent stream types. Few-sizes-fit-all retained the most deciduous and mixed-wood old growth, i.e. low elevation forest types. Two-zone buffers exhibited less temporal variance but an overall lower amount of old growth. (3) Operational and field interpretations of the few-sizes-fit-all guidelines retained three times more riparian area and three to seven times more old growth than just the planning phase alone. (4) Old-growth mixed-wood forests virtually disappeared from both timber harvest and riparian landbases. (5) The primary location of old growth shifted from the harvest to the riparian landbase.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.437
Threshold uncertainty score0.857

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations11
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueForestry An International Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicForest Ecology and Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207