MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2323199982 · doi:10.1139/x11-113

Temporal trends in bird abundance in response to thinning of lodgepole pine (<i>Pinus contorta</i>)

2011· article· en· W2323199982 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Erin M. Bayne, Bruce Nielsen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Forest Service
KeywordsWarblerBiologyEcologyForestryPinus contortaBustardFlycatcherGeographyHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forest managers are continually seeking methods of extracting more timber from the land base while maintaining appropriate wildlife habitat. A 7-year before–after control–impact (BACI) experiment was conducted in 60-year-old lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta Douglas ex Loudon) to determine the effects of thinning on forest birds. One year of pretreatment data was compared with 6 years of posttreatment data. Using linear trend analysis corrected for detection error, we found that Chipping Sparrow (Spizella passerina (Bechstein, 1798)), Dark-eyed Junco (Junco hyemalis (Linnaeus, 1758)), and Red-eyed Vireo (Vireo olivaceus (Linnaeus, 1766)) increased over time in thinned stands and declined in control stands. Alder Flycatcher (Empidonax alnorum Brewster, 1895), Hermit Thrush (Catharus guttatus (Pallas, 1811)), Rose-breasted Grosbeak (Pheucticus ludovicianus (Linnaeus, 1766)), and Blue-headed Vireo (Vireo solitarius (Wilson, 1810)) decreased in control and thinned stands but declined more in controls. Varied Thrush (Ixoreus naevius (J. F. Gemlin, 1789)) and White-winged Crossbill (Loxia leucoptera Gemlin, 1789) increased in control stands relative to thinned areas, where they were stable or declined. A significant interaction between treatment and year was observed for 24 species when year was categorical. Of these, species more likely found in control stands were Boreal Chickadee (Poecile hudsonicus (J.R. Forster, 1772)), Golden-crowned Kinglet (Regulus satrapa Lichtenstein, 1823), and Least Flycatcher (Empidonax minimus (W.M. Baird & S.F. Baird, 1843)), whereas Ruffed Grouse (Bonasa umbellus (Linnaeus, 1766)), Tennessee Warbler (Vermivora peregrina (A. Wilson, 1811)), and Warbling Vireo (Vireo gilvus (Vieillot, 1808)) were more likely in thinned stands. Total bird abundance was higher in thinned stands, which is consistent with 83% of thinning studies in western coniferous forests. Thinning can be a useful tool for achieving wildlife management goals and increasing timber yields.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest Research→Same topicFire effects on ecosystems→French-language works237,207→