Pines and porcupines: a tree-ring analysis of browsing and dynamics of an overmature pine forest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Past feeding activities of the North American porcupine (Erethizon dorsatum L.) in an overmature forest were reconstructed using tree-ring dated feeding scars on jack pine (Pinus banksiana Lamb.) trees in Parc national du Bic (Quebec). Following a long fire-free period, most pines that regenerated after the 1847 fire are currently senescent, moribund, or dead, and the youngest trees are nearly 100 years old. Balsam fir (Abies balsamea (L.) Mill.), the most abundant species in the regeneration layer, is predicted to replace jack pine given the absence of recent fire and present fire protection practices in the park. According to the age structure of feeding scars, porcupine activity has been particularly high during the 1980s, which is coincident with the creation of the park. Porcupine activity was lower before this decade and in the late 20th century and absent in this century (2000–2015). The recent decrease in the number of feeding scars is consistent with the decline of the porcupine population, as shown by censuses of active dens and inventories of individuals. Observed tree death is linked with tree senescence rather than excessive feeding. In the absence of fire, it is probable that the shift from the overmature pine stand to a balsam fir stand will profoundly affect porcupine activity. This research shows how the study of tree rings can unravel some of the ecological relationships structuring a forest ecosystem through fire, succession, and animal browsing.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".