MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2888921937 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2018-0217

The effects of black spruce fuel management on surface fuel condition and peat burn severity in an experimental fire

2018· article· en· W2888921937 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
SOPHIE WILKINSON, Paul Moore, Dan K. Thompson, B. Mike Wotton, Steven Hvenegaard, Dave Schroeder, J. M. Waddington

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsAlberta Ministry of Agriculture and ForestryUniversity of TorontoCanadian Forest ServiceMcMaster UniversityBP (Canada)Natural Resources Canada
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBlack sprucePeatEnvironmental scienceBorealPrescribed burnThinningCarbon blackUnderstoryBulk densityCanopyTaigaForestrySoil waterGeologySoil scienceEcologyMaterials scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the boreal plains ecozone, black spruce (Picea mariana (Mill.) Britton, Sterns & Poggenb.) peatlands can represent large parts of the expanding wildland–urban interface (WUI) and wildland–industry interface (WII). The boreal plains wildfire regime is predicted to increase in areal extent and intensity, amplifying the need for wildfire management to protect the WUI and WII. Forested peatland ecosystems can burn at high intensity and present challenges for wildfire managers such as severe smouldering combustion and large carbon loss. Fuel management techniques such as mulching treatments (converting surface and canopy fuel to a masticated fuelbed) can be applied to black spruce peatlands, yet the impact on fuel load, condition, and peat burn severity is unclear. Using observations from an experimental fire, we found that a mulch-thinning fuel treatment could reduce peat depth of burn. However, where peat bulk density was increased by compaction, this led to an increased peat combustion carbon loss relative to the control. Furthermore, near-total combustion of the mulch layer resulted in significantly more surface fuel carbon emission from thinned and stripped fuel-treated areas compared with the control. We argue that although fuel treatment may benefit smouldering combustion suppression efforts, surface fuel carbon loss should be considered before treatments are implemented on a large scale.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations32
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207