MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2472664852 · doi:10.1111/nph.14081

Gap expansion in old‐growth subarctic forests: the climate–pathogen connection

2016· article· en· W2472664852 on OpenAlexafffund
Corinne Vézeau, Serge Payette

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Phytologist · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicTree-ring climate responses
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCenter for Northern StudiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSubarctic climateWoodlandEcologyBiologyPopulationPrecipitationClimate changeDendrochronologyGeographyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We tested the hypothesis considering old-growth subarctic woodlands, free of fire, insect and stand-scale blowdown disturbances, to be at equilibrium with the climate. To do so, we explored the status of Hudsonian woodlands based on the natality/mortality ratio. The gap history of the woodland was reconstructed based on mapping and dating of dead gap-spruces (Picea mariana). Among the 25 gaps studied, 763 dead trees and only 14 saplings were recorded. The center of some gaps remained treeless over the last 1000 yr, and gap area doubled over the last 100 yr. The status of the tree population is in a demographic disequilibrium caused by the small replacement of dead spruces in all of the gaps. Episodes of 'mass' mortality occurred during several decades corresponding to years of favorable tree-ring growth. The natural process of gap-filling appears to be ineffective under current conditions. Good tree-ring growth of dying trees suggests abundant precipitation during the mortality episodes, but precipitation appears to be involved indirectly in the mortality process. The main cause of the widespread tree mortality during the last centuries of gap expansion appears to be biotic in origin. The impact of pathogenic fungal disease linked to late-lying snow cover is proposed for the mortality events.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.958

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations22
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew PhytologistSame topicTree-ring climate responsesFrench-language works237,207