MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2734396132 · doi:10.3375/043.037.0313

Patterns of Coarse Woody Debris in Hardwood Forests across a Chronosequence of Ash Mortality Due to the Emerald Ash Borer (<i>Agrilus planipennis</i>)

2017· article· en· W2734396132 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Matt Higham, Brian M. Hoven, David L. Gorchov, Kathleen S. Knight

Bibliographic record

VenueNatural Areas Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmerald ash borerFraxinusAgrilusChronosequenceBasal areaBuprestidaeCoarse woody debrisWood ashEcologyEnvironmental scienceBiologyEcological successionHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The invasive emerald ash borer (Agrilus planipennis) (EAB) is causing widespread ash (Fraxinus spp.) mortality in 25 U.S. states and two Canadian provinces. We investigated the impact of EAB on coarse woody debris (CWD) volume across 24 sites in western and central Ohio, USA, representing a chronosequence of ash mortality, quantified by the year ash mortality reached 25% (Year25�ad). CWD volume averaged 60.36 m3/ha, and was positively associated with total (live plus dead) ash basal area (BA), but was not greater in sites where ash death occurred earlier. For the volume of CWD in the first, least-rotted, decay class, stepwise regression revealed that both ash BA and Year25�ad were significant predictors; sites with more ash BA and where ash mortality had occurred earlier had more class 1 CWD. Additionally, class 1 CWD in those early mortality sites was primarily (87%) ash, compared to 40% ash in sites with more recent ash mortality. This large influx of CWD, particularly ash CWD, combined with future inputs from ash that are still standing, will elevate CWD volume in the near future, especially in sites with greater ash basal area.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.261
Threshold uncertainty score0.519

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations12
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNatural Areas JournalSame topicForest Ecology and Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207