The potential influence of mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae) control harvesting on grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) food supply and habitat conditions in Alberta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In response to the mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae) threat in Alberta, forest companies plan to surge harvest 75% of susceptible (mature) lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta) stands over 20 years. To assess potential changes to grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) habitat, I projected food availability over 60 years in the Upper Foothills. I also examined grizzly bear response to pine age, and its interaction with elevation and edge proximity. Post surge, forbs were predicted to increase by 25% and fruits by 2%. After 60 years, forbs should remain above (13%) while fruits could decline below (10%) pre-harvest conditions. Less Vaccinium membranaceum shrubs above 1228m and reduced Vaccinium myrtilloides fruit production below 1228m contributed to the decline. If the surge cut proceeds, efforts should be made to increase fruit production by enhancing shrubs at specific environmental conditions (age, elevation). Small cut-blocks near non-harvested pine seemed to be particularly beneficial for bears.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".