MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802087384 · doi:10.3390/f9050256

Spruce Budworm (Choristoneura fumiferana Clem.) Defoliation Promotes Vertical Fuel Continuity in Ontario’s Boreal Mixedwood Forest

2018· article· en· W2802087384 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Graham A. Watt, Richard A. Fleming, Sandy M. Smith, Marie‐Josée Fortin

Bibliographic record

VenueForests · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsCanadian Forest ServiceNatural Resources CanadaUniversity of Toronto
FundersMinistry of Natural Resources
KeywordsChoristoneura fumiferanaSpruce budwormUnderstoryTaigaBorealCrown (dentistry)ForestryEnvironmental scienceSnagHost (biology)EcologyTortricidaeBiologyGeographyHabitatCanopyLepidoptera genitalia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spruce budworm, Choristoneura fumiferana (Clem.), defoliation has been shown to affect the occurrence of crown fire in Ontario, highlighting the need to better understand the driving factors of this effect on forest structure, including changes in fuel loading, type and position. Here, we investigate five boreal mixedwood sites within four zones that experienced different durations of continuous defoliation by spruce budworm in northeastern Ontario. Duration of defoliation had significant effects on vertical stand components, namely, host overstory to host understory crown overlap, host overstory and host understory crown to downed woody debris overlap, and downed woody debris height and quantity. Vertical stand components tended to increase with the duration of continuous defoliation, with the highest vertical fuel continuity occurring after 16 years of continuous defoliation. Such increases in the vertical spatial continuity of fuels may be a key reason for the greater percentage of area burned in those forests which have recently sustained a spruce budworm outbreak.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.733
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations10
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueForestsSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207