EFFECTS OF SELECTION CUTTING ON BIRD COMMUNITIES IN CONTIGUOUS EASTERN HARDWOOD FORESTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We used point counts to sample bird communities in hardwood forest stands following single-tree selection harvest to determine the impacts on birds of this harvesting system. We sampled at 1–5 years post-harvest (n = 24), 15–20 years post-harvest (n = 23), and in reference stands subjected only to natural disturbances for >30 years (n = 24). White-throated sparrow (Zonotrichia albicollis), chestnut-sided warbler (Dendroica pensylvanica), and mourning warbler (Oporornis philadelphia) abundances were significantly higher in recently logged stands than in other treatments. Ovenbird (Seiurus aurocapillus) abundance was about 50% lower in recently logged stands and in stands logged 15–20 years previous than in reference stands. Black-throated blue warbler (Dendroica caerulescens) and yellow-bellied sapsucker (Sphyrapicus varius) abundances were similar in reference and recently logged stands but significantly lower in stands harvested 15–20 years previously. Redundancy Analysis (RDA) identified 6 habitat variables associated with changes in avian abundances. Percent shrub and slash cover were higher in recently logged stands than in older logged and reference stands. Deciduous canopy cover and basal area of living deciduous trees were greater in reference stands than in both logged treatments. Although the abundance of some bird species were statistically lower in selection cut stands, the implications to population persistence will require data on reproductive success in combination with population modeling with varying proportions of the forested landscape committed to selection cutting.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".