MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2807655659 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2018-0097

Long-term influence of disturbance-generated microsites on forest structural and compositional development

2018· article· en· W2807655659 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Emma M. Sass, Anthony W. D’Amato, David R. Foster, Audrey Barker Plotkin, Shawn Fraver, Peter Schoonmaker, David A. Orwig

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Vermont
KeywordsMicrositeDisturbance (geology)WindthrowEcologyStand developmentBiologyEnvironmental scienceSeedlingAgronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wind disturbance generates heterogeneous microsite structures, including downed logs, windthrow mounds, and pits. While these structures can provide opportunities for regeneration of certain tree species, the long-term influence of microsites and microsite heterogeneity on forest development has not been quantified. We used long-term measurements of a formerly old-growth Tsuga canadensis – Pinus strobus forest severely damaged by a category 3 hurricane in 1938 to quantify the impact of microsite conditions on overstory composition and structure. We asked (i) “What are the patterns in live-tree size, growth, and mortality five and seven decades after disturbance?” and (ii) “What roles do microsite heterogeneity and the presence of disturbance-generated microsites play in long-term forest development following disturbance?” We compared live-tree (>2 cm DBH) development and survival to microsite heterogeneity at the 100 m2 scale. Microsite diversity was positively related to overstory species diversity and stem density and negatively related to average tree size. We propose that plots with higher microsite diversity may have experienced more severe local disturbance, which allowed more species and individuals to establish and created varied niches that allowed these individuals to coexist and generate greater stand-level diversity. These persistent relationships highlight how microsite conditions affect forest development after severe disturbances.

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)0.001
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 score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations9
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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