The Distribution of Some Rare Coastal Lichens in the Pacific Northwest and Their Association with Late-seral and Federally-protected Forests
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
Using data from randomly-selected surveys, historic locations, and ‘purposive’ surveys of likely habitats, fifteen rare epiphytic lichens (Bryoria pseudocapillaris, B. spiralifera, B. subcana, Erioderma sorediatum, Heterodermia leucomela, Hypotrachyna revoluta, Leioderma sorediatum, Leptogium brebissonii, Niebla cephalota, Pannaria rubiginosa, Pseudocyphellaria perpetua, Pyrrhospora quernea, Ramalina pollinaria, Teloschistes flavicans, and Usnea hesperina) were assessed for frequency and distribution on publicly owned lands along the immediate Pacific coast from the Canadian border south to San Francisco and for association with late seral forests and federally protected lands. A total of 178 sites of 0.04 ha each were surveyed in 2000 and 2001; 129 were randomly selected. The major distribution patterns were CA and OR coastlines ± Puget Sound, OR and WA coastlines, and OR and WA Coast and western Cascades Ranges, following major regional climatic gradients. Frequency varied considerably by state, all lichens except P. quernea were rare in at least one state (no detections among randomly selected survey sites). Odds ratio tests provided suggestive evidence that most populations of U. hesperina are in forests > 80 years old, and good evidence that forest age is not an important predictor of occurrence for R. pollinaria and H. leucomela. Ten of the target species were associated with ≤ two federally protected land allocations, and none were primarily found on protected allocations. Therefore actions on unprotected state and federal lands in the 21st century will influence persistence. Target populations for conservation are discussed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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