Impact of primary and secondary machinery tracks on fine root growth of sugar maple after selection cutting
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Selection cutting, where approximately 30% of the trees are removed every 30 years, is the main silvicultural treatment used in temperate deciduous forests of Quebec (Canada). Concerns have been raised that the use of heavy machinery is creating soil disturbances that are negatively affecting the growth and survival of remaining trees. The aim of the study was to determine if heavy machinery is affecting the growth, morphology, and architecture of sugar maple (Acer saccharum Marsh.) fine roots in and around machinery tracks left after selection logging. The study site, a sugar maple dominated stand, was located in southern Quebec. Root ingrowth bags and standard root cores were used to compare fine root growth, morphology, and architecture in and around machinery tracks one year after logging. Fine root growth of maple was reduced fivefold in both primary (multiple trip) and secondary (only one trip) machinery tracks compared with the control. There was a nonstatistical reduction in fine root growth within 1 m of the tracks. Because machinery tracks cover between 15% and 25% of a stand after selection logging, such reduction in fine root growth could be significant for the growth and survival of the remaining mature maple trees.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it