Response of forest soil Acari to prescribed fire following stand structure manipulation in the southern Cascade RangeThis article is one of a selection of papers from the Special Forum on Ecological Studies in Interior Ponderosa Pine — First Findings from Blacks Mountain Interdisciplinary Research.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We studied responses of Acari, especially oribatid mites, to prescribed low-intensity fire in an east side pine site in the southern Cascade Range in California. We compared oribatid population and assemblage responses to prescribed fire in stands that had been selectively logged to enhance old growth characteristics, in logged stands to minimize old growth characteristics, and in undisturbed forest reference stands. Low-intensity prescribed fire altered habitat characteristics within the organic layer of forest soil. Acarine populations declined following prescribed fire, and oribatid losses accounted for two thirds of that decline. Individual oribatid species responded differently to prescribed fire, with a few populations increasing after fire but most declining. The prescribed fire also altered oribatid assemblages, reducing species richness and species diversity and modifying assemblage dominance relationships. We also identified several oribatid taxa that were potential indicator species of fire effects upon forest soil fauna. Finally, our results suggested that oribatid responses to fire were intensified by stand alteration and especially by removal of old growth structural characteristics. Decline in oribatid abundance, species richness and diversity, and loss of equilibrium dominance relationships was greatest in the low structural diversity plots.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".