MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Experimental Restoration of Disturbed Cliff‐Edge Forests in Bruce Peninsula National Park, Ontario, Canada

2003· article· en· W2161550573 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Uta Matthes, John A. Gerrath, Douglas W. Larson

Bibliographic record

VenueRestoration Ecology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersParks Canada
KeywordsNational parkCliffRestoration ecologyVisitor patternSowingCanopyGeographyForestryVegetation (pathology)PeninsulaAgroforestryWildlifeEcologyEnvironmental scienceBiologyAgronomyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Restoration of degraded natural vegetation in parks is often complicated by the need to maintain public access. We tested whether the natural canopy species, Thuja occidentalis , can be restored to degraded cliff edges in Bruce Peninsula National Park, Ontario, Canada without reductions in visitor numbers. Eighty 10‐year‐old and 80 4‐year‐old container‐grown saplings and 1,400 seeds were planted and monitored for 4 years. Eight treatments were applied that tested for effects of planting site (distance from cliff edge and pathways) and supportive measures (soil, water, cages, or signs) on survival, growth, and damage. No trees became successfully established from seed. Younger trees showed faster initial establishment and growth, but 4‐year survival was the same for both age groups (39%). Supplemental soil improved the health of planted trees, and both soil and water slightly improved their survival. Cages did not affect survival and growth but decreased damage to 4‐year‐old trees and increased it for 10‐year‐olds. Signs had no effect on any measured variable. Trees planted away from the cliff edge and from pathways had the greatest establishment success, 4‐year survival, and general health. Relative visitor density, as estimated from spot counts of visitors, had the largest effect on restoration success; the results suggest a threshold of visitor density above which restoration may be impossible. Planting location, especially with respect to shade, was also important. The planting of 4‐year‐old trees without supportive measures is suggested as the most cost‐effective restoration technique at this site. The results indicate that restoration of open woodland habitats is possible without total visitor exclusion but that some restrictions on visitor numbers or activities are necessary.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.779
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.229 · 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.

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

Citations6
Published2003
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRestoration EcologySame topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207