MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170390048 · doi:10.1139/x08-053

Fire history of pinyon–juniper woodlands at upper ecotones with ponderosa pine forests in Arizona and New Mexico

2008· article· en· W2170390048 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
David W. Huffman, Peter Z. Fulé, Kristen M. Pearson, Joseph E. Crouse

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJuniperEcotoneWoodlandGeographyForestryFire historyDendrochronologyEcologyFire ecologyPinus <genus>BiologyEcosystemArchaeologyHabitatBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We used maps of fire evidence, fire scar dendrochronology, forest age-structure analysis, and landscape analysis to investigate fire history at pinyon pine ( Pinus edulis Engelm.) – juniper ( Juniperus osteosperma (Torr.) Little, Juniperus scopulorum Sarg.) woodland – ponderosa pine ( Pinus ponderosa P. & C. Lawson) forest ecotones in Arizona (Tusayan) and in New Mexico (Canjilon). Results showed that charred trees were not evenly distributed across vegetative communities but were significantly (p < 0.001) more abundant than expected in ponderosa pine communities. Composite fire scar analysis indicated that surface fires occurred in ponderosa pine stands at both sites and burned at intervals of 7.2–11.1 years (WMPI; Weibull median probability interval). At Tusayan, landscape structure was fine grained, and maximum pinyon age was >200 years across 80% of the site. At Canjilon, landscape pattern was relatively coarse, and most pinyon patches were 200–300 years old. Cumulative standing age distributions suggested pinyon–juniper fire rotations of 340 and 290 years at Tusayan and Canjilon, respectively. We concluded the following: (i) surface fires in ponderosa pine stands did not spread through pinyon–juniper communities at either site, (ii) fire evidence was prevalent across both sites, but old pinyon trees indicated that no widespread lethal fires had occurred in the last 300–400 years, and (iii) structurally heterogeneous landscapes suggested that historical pinyon–juniper fires were of limited extent but lethal in patches.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score0.233

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations50
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207