MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765215198 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2017-0206

Ecological impact of a microburst windstorm in a northern hardwood forest

2017· article· en· W2765215198 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
John J. Battles, Natalie L. Cleavitt, David Saah, Benjamin T. Poling, Timothy J. Fahey

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTree Root and Stability Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNorthern Research StationU.S. Department of AgricultureU.S. Forest ServiceNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMicroburstYellow birchCanopyHardwoodEcologyWindthrowSeral communityExperimental forestAceraceaeForestryFagaceaeStormEnvironmental scienceGeographyEcological successionBiologyMapleMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We quantified damage by a microburst windstorm to a northern hardwood forest (Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest, New Hampshire). These storms may be important in regulating the structure and composition of forests of the northeastern United States, but few studies of damage patterns from microbursts have been reported. In the 600 ha area most heavily impacted by the microburst at Hubbard Brook, 4.6% of the canopy was removed. Although most disturbances were small (<200 m2), much (22%) of the area damaged by the storm was associated with one 5.2 ha blowdown within which 76% of the trees suffered severe damage. Roughly one-half of the damaged trees were uprooted and one-quarter were snapped off, with few differences among tree species. The remaining trees in the blowdown either avoided damage or suffered less severe damage (i.e., leaning but not snapped or uprooted). Regeneration of shade-intolerant (pin cherry (Prunus pensylvanica L. f.)) and mid-tolerant (yellow birch (Betula alleghaniensis Britt.), red maple (Acer rubrum L.)) trees was present in the large canopy gaps. While recruitment opportunities in these large gaps may be important for maintaining populations of pioneer species, the limited spatial extent of microbursts suggests that they play a minor role in the overall dynamics of the northeastern forest.

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 score0.123
Threshold uncertainty score0.245

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations19
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicTree Root and Stability StudiesFrench-language works237,207