Seed Rain and Seedling Establishment of Picea glauca and Abies balsamea after Partial Cutting in Plantations and Natural Stands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The conditions for natural regeneration of white spruce (Picea glauca) and balsam fir (Abies balsamea) in 12 natural stands and five plantations containing both species were investigated 9 to 30 years after partial cutting. We estimated seed input on the ground, measured light reaching the understory, and recorded the presence and age of seedlings smaller than 150 cm in height on six different substrates: mineral soil, moss, rotten wood, litterfall, herbaceous, and dead wood. Partial cutting generally prompted the establishment and growth of seedlings. The number of fir and spruce seedlings is always greater in natural stands than in plantations, a trend likely associated with the reduced abundance of suitable substrate for establishment in the latter. White spruce is significantly associated to rotten wood while fir settles on all types of substrates that cover at least 10% of the forest floor. There is a strong relationship between light intensity and the median height of spruce seedlings, but this relationship is non-significant for fir. Seedlings of both species can survive at incident light intensities as low as 3%, but an intensity of 15% or more seems to offer the best growth conditions. The results of this study provide guidelines for successful forest regeneration following partial cuts in spruce-fir stands.
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 | 0.000 |
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 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".