Bryophyte abundance, diversity and composition after retention harvest in boreal mixedwood forest
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Variable‐retention harvest is widely recognized as an alternative to more intensive methods such as clear‐cutting. However, present information is inadequate to judge the impact of variable retention on biodiversity of indigenous forest organisms intolerant of canopy removal, such as forest‐inhabiting bryophytes. We examined how bryophyte species cover, richness, diversity and composition change with time in response to a broad range of dispersed retention harvest treatments (2% [clear‐cut], 10%, 20%, 50%, 75% retention of original basal area) contrasted with uncut controls [100% retention]) in broadleaf deciduous, mixedwood and conifer‐dominated boreal forests in North West Alberta, Canada. Bryophytes were studied in 432 permanent sample plots within 72 compartments before harvest and at 3, 6 and 11 years after harvest. Clear‐cut and lower (10% and 20%) retention levels resulted in lower cover and richness of bryophytes than in unharvested control compartments in mixed and conifer‐dominated forests, but less so in deciduous‐dominated forests, which generally supported low cover and richness. Species composition in each forest type varied along the gradient of harvesting intensity; clear‐cuts and lower levels of retention supported similar composition, as did control plots and those representing higher retention levels. Over time, the retention harvest treatments became more similar to uncut controls. Synthesis and applications . Variable‐retention harvests can better maintain bryophyte biodiversity in managed boreal mixedwood forests, as compared to clear‐cuts. We found the efficacy of retention harvest scaled with harvest intensity. Higher levels of retention better moderated the negative impacts of harvesting on bryophyte assemblages across all forest types. Our results suggest, however, that even 10% retention will facilitate faster post‐harvest recovery of bryophytes, as compared to clear‐cutting.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 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 it