MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2186686638 · doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2015.11.015

Trends in post-disturbance recovery rates of Canada’s forests following wildfire and harvest

2015· article· en· W2186686638 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueForest Ecology and Management · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsCanadian Forest ServiceLakehead University
FundersNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Space Agency
KeywordsDisturbance (geology)Environmental scienceEcologyForestryAgroforestryGeographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The recovery of forests following stand-replacing disturbance is of widespread interest; however, there is both a lack of definitional clarity for the term “recovery” and a dearth of empirical data on the rates of forest recovery associated with different disturbance types. We conducted a quantitative review of literature to determine recovery times following wildfire and timber harvest and to evaluate variation in recovery rates across Canada’s diverse forest ecosystems. Recovery was assessed according to the rate of change associated with certain forest structural attributes that have traditionally been used as indicators of forest growth and productivity. The recovery of forest canopy cover, tree height, and stand basal area varied at rates that depended on disturbance type, forest biome, and ecozone. We found that, on average, it took 5–10 years, depending on factors such as location and species, for most forest ecosystems of Canada to attain a benchmark canopy cover of 10% after wildfire or harvest. Similarly, regenerating stands in Canada’s boreal forests were capable of attaining average heights of 5 m within five to ten years after wildfire or harvest. Stands in the Boreal Plains ecozone post-harvest reached stand basal area, benchmarked at 10 m2 ha−1, faster than those in the Boreal Shield, attributable to differences in tree species composition and the rich mineral deposits of the Boreal Plains. Overall, recovery of canopy cover, tree height, and stand basal area was similar or more rapid following wildfire than harvest. Our review provides temporal benchmarks for gauging recovery times after disturbance. Building upon these temporal benchmarks, and conditioned by disturbance type, site conditions, and location, we present opportunities for using dense time series of remotely sensed data to inform on regional and national trends in forest recovery following disturbance.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.847
Threshold uncertainty score0.884

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.199 · 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