Early responses to thinning treatments designed to accelerate late successional forest structure in young coniferous stands of western Oregon, USA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The loss of critical habitat provided by late successional forests has prompted the search for management options that can accelerate the development of late successional forest structure in young stands. We examined operational-scale commercial thinning treatments at seven sites to evaluate if thinning could accelerate development of late successional forest structures in 40–60 year old Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco) forests. Thinning treatments included an untreated control, high density, moderate density, and variable density retention. All thinning treatments had leave islands, and moderate density and variable density included harvest-created gaps. Thinned units, especially moderate density and variable density, had greater spatial variability in tree density, supported lower live branches, had greater tree regeneration and growth, and had slightly lower mortality relative to the control. Canopy gaps extended the range of stand densities and increased growth of trees immediately along gap edges. However, thinning had little effect on growth of the largest Douglas-fir trees and did little to provide large snags or coarse woody debris. These results suggest that thinning treatments can accelerate some aspects, e.g., spatial variability, of late successional forest structures. Other attributes, such as large trees and snags, may prove less responsive to thinning treatments, at least in the short term. Including tree retention levels lower than typical management applications and formation of canopy gaps provide the wide range of conditions that appears beneficial for developing late successional forest structure.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".