Prescribed fire as a tool to regenerate live and dead serotinous jack pine (Pinus banksiana) stands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study documents cone opening and natural regeneration of jack pine (Pinus banksiana Lamb.) after burning live and dead stands similar to those killed by the mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae). Trees were killed by girdling in May and were burned in late July, 26 months later. Pairs of live and dead plots were simultaneously burned using three types of fire: surface, intermittent crown and continuous crown fires. Each type of fire was replicated three times; the nine pairs of burns were completed in a 4-day period. After fire, more cones were opened on dead trees than live trees. On dead trees, there was cone opening even when fire charred only the lower part of the bole. Three years after burning, dead stands with continuous crown fires had some of the densest regeneration and the highest rates of stocking. Across all burns in this study, seedling regeneration was best in shallow residual duff and in the more intensely burned plots. Without burning, there was virtually no regeneration 5 years after mortality. The results also show that burning, especially under continuous crown fire, could be used to promote regeneration in dead stands.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 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".