MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2332641400 · doi:10.33338/ef.84351

Responses of two <i>Sericoda</i> Kirby, 1837 (Coleoptera: Carabidae) species to forest harvesting, wildfire, and burn severity

2006· article· en· W2332641400 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Matti Koivula, Tyler Cobb, Andrea D. Déchêne, Joshua M. Jacobs, J. David Spence

Bibliographic record

VenueEntomologica Fennica · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Forest ServiceKillam TrustsAlberta-Pacific Forest IndustriesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaU.S. Forest ServiceUniversity of AlbertaAlberta Conservation Association
KeywordsSalvage loggingAbundance (ecology)LoggingEcological successionTaigaEcologyBorealDisturbance (geology)ForestryEnvironmental scienceGeographyAgroforestryBiologyForest ecologyEcosystem

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forest fires are among the most important natural disturbances in the boreal region, but fire-initiated succession is increasingly often interrupted by salvage logging, i.e., post-fire removal of burned trees. Unfortunately, very little is known about the ecological effects of this practice. To address this knowledge gap and to examine other factors affecting the abundance of two fire-associated carabid species (Sericoda quadripuntata and S. bembidioides) we conducted three field studies based on pitfall trapping in recent burns in Alberta, Canada. The results suggest that the abundance of both species drastically decreased from the first to the third post-fire year and that fire severity was positively associated with abundance of both species. The combined effects of wildfire and forest harvesting were associated with higher catches of S. quadripunctata, but lower catches of S. bembidioides. We discuss these findings in the contexts of salvage logging and species ecology.

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 score0.110
Threshold uncertainty score0.218

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations39
Published2006
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEntomologica FennicaSame topicForest Insect Ecology and ManagementFrench-language works237,207