MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2531307522 · doi:10.1002/ecs2.1488

Management of forest regeneration in boreal and temperate deer–forest systems: challenges, guidelines, and research gaps

2016· article· en· W2531307522 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueEcosphere · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsCentre de Géomatique du QuébecMinistère des Ressources naturelles et des ForêtsCenter for Northern StudiesUniversité Laval
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRegeneration (biology)Environmental resource managementForest managementUngulateAdaptive managementTemperate rainforestEcologyForest ecologyForest restorationGeographyAgroforestryEcosystemEnvironmental scienceBiologyHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Heavy browsing pressure from large ungulates is a multicontinent phenomenon that causes regeneration failure of many palatable tree species and induces important socioeconomic and ecological impacts in forest ecosystems. The development of forest management practices that address adequately this issue, however, remains scarce and challenging because (1) large herbivores are both a resource and a source of disturbance; (2) the management of forests and ungulate populations remains largely disconnected in practice; and (3) we still lack a good understanding of the role of critical factors, especially deer densities, vegetation attributes, and their interactions, on the magnitude of browsing damages on forest regeneration. We bring new insights into these challenging issues by critically reviewing the current methods used by managers and conservationists to mitigate deer impacts on forest regeneration, emphasizing the spatial scale at which these methods are undertaken. Specifically, we review management actions at multiple scales on both deer populations (e.g., hunting) and vegetation (e.g., silvicultural treatments) that are common to most deer–forest systems and, for that reason, deserve priority investigation. We identify strengths and limitations of current management actions and highlight the main research gaps. Based on this review, we propose a new integrated management scheme that explicitly addresses: (1) the integration and prioritization of management actions, (2) the development of adaptive management plans, and (3) the participation of stakeholders. Conflicting demands by different stakeholders have challenged the effectiveness of management strategies in deer–forest systems. To reverse this situation, we advocate for a shift of paradigm and the development of integrated strategies that (1) bridge the gap between management actions and the design of in situ experiments and (2) coordinate actions at multiple spatial scales on both deer populations and forests. We propose a new framework informed by key objectives and grounded in the adaptive management paradigm to support this transition, and suggest a research agenda for the next decade(s).

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.640

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.235 · 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