MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2766918408 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2017-0233

Long-term decline of sugar maple following forest harvest, Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest, New Hampshire

2017· article· en· W2766918408 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Natalie L. Cleavitt, John J. Battles, Chris E. Johnson, Timothy J. Fahey

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Forest ServiceU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsMapleYellow birchAceraceaeSugarBeechClearcuttingDominance (genetics)BotanyBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forest harvesting can impact site quality by removing essential nutrients, exacerbating the effects of historic base cation losses associated with acid deposition. We studied the 30-year trajectory of forest recovery from clearcutting (whole-tree harvest (WTH)) in a forest originally dominated by sugar maple (Acer saccharum Marsh.). At both the watershed scale (21.9 ha) and the “detailed” plot scale (1 m2), a dramatic decline of sugar maple was observed, along with maintenance of American beech (Fagus grandifolia Ehrh.) and an increase in birch, mainly yellow birch (Betula alleghaniensis Britt.). Many of the “detailed” plots where sugar maple failed to recruit became unoccupied rather than being “won” by another species. The decline of sugar maple was most severe in the upper elevation zones of the watershed, where low base status (especially Ca) of the soils was a likely driver. The results support previous studies indicating that regeneration by sugar maple is severely compromised on base cation depleted soils. Lower survival of seedlings for sugar maple emphasized the importance of maintaining advance regeneration to favor desired species such as sugar maple. Foresters should consider that sites with low base saturation and exchangeable Ca are likely to exhibit regeneration failure for sugar maple in the long term, even those with initial dominance by this species.

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 score0.576
Threshold uncertainty score0.852

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations43
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicForest Ecology and Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207