Are marginal balsam fir and eastern white cedar stands relics from once more extensive populations in north-eastern North America?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Marginal stands of balsam fir ( Abies balsamea [L.] Mill.) and eastern white cedar ( Thuja occidentalis L.) are found north of their limits of continuous distribution in eastern North America. Regional-scale paleoecological studies have suggested that fir and cedar populations could have had larger extents in the past. This study aimed at verifying this hypothesis at the local scale. Wood charcoal fragments were collected from the soils of two marginal fir and cedar stands as well as from 15 sites in the surrounding forest matrix where the species are absent currently. Anatomical identification and radiocarbon-dating showed that fir was more extensive in the study area until about 680 cal. BP, representing up to 31% of the charcoal assemblages at sites where it is currently absent. The evidence is less conclusive for cedar, however, although some of the charcoal fragments from the matrix sites could have been either fir or cedar (undistinguishable). Most of the dated fir/cedar charcoal in the matrix were from the ‘Medieval Warm Period’ (ca. 1000 cal. BP), suggesting contraction may have occurred at that time. Marginal fir – and possibly cedar – stands are thus relics of once more extensive populations. Fire is likely the main factor having contributed to the contraction of the species’ distributions. Fir and cedar are now relegated to areas where fires are less frequent and severe, such as the shores of lakes and rivers.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
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.
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".