Landscape host abundance and configuration regulate periodic outbreak behavior in spruce budworm <i>Choristoneura fumiferana</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Landscape‐level forest management has long been hypothesized to affect forest insect outbreak dynamics, but empirical evidence remains elusive. We hypothesized that the combination of increased hardwood relative to host tree species, prevalence of younger forests, and fragmentation of those forests due to forest harvesting legacies would reduce outbreak intensity, increase outbreak frequency, and decrease spatial synchrony in spruce budworm Choristoneura fumiferana outbreaks. We investigated these hypotheses using tree ring samples collected across 51 sites pooled into 16 subareas distributed across a large ecoregion spanning the international border between Ontario (Canada), and Minnesota (USA). This ecoregion contains contrasting land management zones with clear differences in forest landscape structure (i.e. forest composition and spatial configuration) while minimizing the confounding influence of climate. Cluster analyses of the 76‐yr time‐series generally grouped by subareas found within the same land management zone. Spatial nonparametric covariance analysis indicated that the highest and lowest degree of spatial synchrony of spruce budworm outbreaks were found within unmanaged wilderness and lands managed at fine spatial scales in Minnesota, respectively. Using multivariate analysis, we also found that forest composition, configuration, and climate together accounted for a total of 40% of the variance in outbreak chronologies, with a high level of shared variance between composition and configuration (13%) and between composition and climate (9%). At the scale of our study, climate on its own did not explain any of the spatial variation in outbreaks. Outbreaks were of higher frequency, lower intensity, and less spatially synchronized in more fragmented, younger forests with a lower proportion of host species, with opposing outbreak characteristics observed in regions characterised by older forests with more concentrated host species. Our study is the first quantitative evaluation of the long‐standing ‘silvicultural hypothesis’ of spruce budworm management specifically conducted at a spatio‐temporal scale for which it was intended.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".