Environmental factors responsible for shaping an open peatland forest complex on the hypermaritime north coast of British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The relationships between the distribution of plant communities and environmental factors were studied in an open peatland forest complex of the hypermaritime north coast of British Columbia. The entire vegetation gradient, from open through forested peatlands to upland forest, was primarily explained by slope and minimum level of groundwater table. Environmental conditions in the upland TsugaRhytidiadelphus forest were considerably different from those of the other communities; differences were small among the Sphagnum open peatland, the PinusSphagnum woodland, the ChamaecyparisFauria forest, and the ThujaGaultheria forest. Highest level of groundwater table, conductivity minimum, pH, and dissolved oxygen merely helped distinguish the upland TsugaRhytidiadelphus forest from all other communities. The wet ThujaGaultheria forest could be more vulnerable than the upland TsugaRhytidiadelphus forest to local hydrological changes caused by harvesting. Consecutive intraannual measurements of environmental variables are important in clarifying the relationships between distribution of plant communities and environmental variables, especially for communities with peat accumulation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".