Experimental manipulation of habitat structures in intensively managed spruce plantations to increase their value for biodiversity conservation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Six intensively managed white spruce (Picea glauca (Moench) Voss) plantations located in three general landscape contexts (plantation dominated, hardwood dominated, and mixed hardwood and plantation) in northern New Brunswick underwent alternative commercial thinning (CT) treatments: 1) an unthinned control; and three 40% basal area CT removals, with 2) slash and tops remaining on site (status quo CT), 3) branches and tops extracted from the site (biomass removal CT), and 4) clumps of unthinned trees left, and one-half girdled to create snags (enhanced structure CT). We examined responses of taxa that have a clear connection to deadwood and thinning response: beetles and bird species that are directly dependent upon deadwood, ground vegetation species sensitive to disturbance, and small mammals that have been observed to have low density in planted stands. Results three years post-thinning showed that crown width and tree growth responded positively to CT, and herbaceous vegetation diverged from reference stands and unthinned treatments with CT, but greatest compositional change was associated with biomass removal CT. Beetles responded positively to CT, small mammal species responded both positively (red-backed voles) and negatively (woodland jumping mice) to CT, but areas dominated by plantations had negative effects on voles. Effects of CT on songbirds were unclear and their quantification would require larger treated blocks, but maintenance of habitat at the landscape level is essential for the conservation of bird species that require deadwood. The experimental biomass removal CT was least similar to both unthinned and older unmanaged stands, and may therefore be detrimental to biodiversity conservation efforts. These results are only the initial three years after treatment but set the study up to permit a long-term legacy of determining long-term responses of taxa over stand development.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".