Boreal bryophyte response to natural fire edge creation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Question Changes in species richness and composition in plant communities as a result of edge creation are well documented in anthropogenically modified landscapes, but what happens after natural disturbance? We investigate the responses of boreal bryophytes to edge creation in a post‐wildfire residual forest patch system. Location Boreal black spruce–feather moss forest, western Québec, Canada. Methods Bryophyte community was sampled in 50‐m 2 plots: 117 plots in 39 undisturbed forest cores (control) and 108 plots in 30 residual forest patches from wildfire, divided into 48 core plots, 30 north‐facing edge plots and 30 south‐facing edge plots. Temporal, severity, spatial and structural characteristics of the stands were also recorded to explain bryophyte community composition. Results Residual edges and cores were more species‐rich than undisturbed cores, particularly north‐facing edges, but community composition differed between undisturbed and residual cores. Indicator species of undisturbed cores and residual edges differed in their species traits. Spatial variables explained variations in composition, with a larger difference between core and edge communities in patches over 3 ha compared to smaller patches. Conclusion We observed community composition change in response to natural edge creation. While edge influence is reduced in large patches, the bryophyte community remains distinct from undisturbed cores. This community change is a ‘control’ in studies of boreal bryophyte response to anthropogenic edge creation, and suggests that we should consider the natural range of variability. Finally, this study emphasizes that forest remnants do not substitute for continuous and undisturbed forests.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".