Demography and spatial dynamics in balsam fir stands after a spruce budworm outbreak
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The renewal of balsam fir (Abies balsamea (L.) P. Mill.) stands is related to the recurrent spruce budworm (Archips fumiferana Clemens [syn.: Choristoneura fumiferana (Clemens)]) outbreaks that favour the growth of the regeneration following death of the dominant trees. The aim of this study was to investigate the population demography and the spatial relationships among individuals in four permanent plots of the boreal forest of Quebec, Canada, after a spruce budworm outbreak. This was realized by collecting data on trees and saplings every five years from 1994 to 2004 and by using Ripley’s K statistics. The younger plots showed recruitment of up to 90 new trees·ha–1·year–1, and mortality following competition among individuals affected up to 27% and 50% of the trees and saplings, respectively. In the plot with the lowest tree density, sapling recruitment was estimated as 378 new individuals·ha–1·year–1. Saplings were aggregated at all spatial scales, whereas trees showed a random pattern of stem distribution. A significant tendency to separation between saplings and trees was observed. The specific stand dynamics observed in balsam fir are connected to an abundant advance regeneration and an age-dependent competition for resources in a heterogeneous environment with different levels of resource availability.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".