Resident and cavity-nesting avian community is affected by amount but not age of white pine in central Ontario mature mixedwood forests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Forests with old-growth white pines have been severely reduced compared with historical levels. We examined resident and cavity-nesting bird species abundances in winter and the breeding season, because some of these species may prefer old-forest habitats for breeding. We counted birds over 10 years in four mixedwood types: old pine, mature pine, mature nonpine, and selection-harvested stands. We expected that old pine stands would be selected by some species because of abundant snags and large trees for foraging. We assessed habitat use among years and changes following harvesting. Counts of nomadic species varied across years but counts for others did not. Species used old and mature pine mixedwoods equally and more than nonpine or harvested stands in winter and for breeding, but old stands were not preferred. Important variables included percent pine and large tree density. Selection harvesting benefitted Yellow-bellied Sapsuckers but reduced counts of Black-capped Chickadees and Brown Creepers. Black-capped Chickadees changed habitats between seasons and in some years. Black-backed Woodpeckers were most common in pine stands but abundant in harvested stands for 2 years following cutting. Regardless of stand age, large (>40 cm) pines provide important habitat for residents and cavity nesters.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".