Partial cutting in mixedwood stands: Effects of treatment configuration and intensity on stand structure, regeneration, and tree mortality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In temperate and boreal mixedwood forests of eastern North America, partial disturbances such as insect outbreaks and gap dynamics result in the development of irregular forest structures. From a forest ecosystem management perspective, management of these forests should therefore include silvicultural regimes that incorporate medium- to high-retention harvesting. We present 12-year results of a field experiment undertaken to evaluate the effects of variable retention harvesting on stand structure, recruitment, and mortality. Treatments were gap harvesting (GAP), diameter-limit harvesting (DL), careful logging (CL), and careful logging followed by scarification (CL + SCAR), and an unharvested control. Although post-harvest basal area in the GAP treatment was significantly lower than that of controls, it maintained a diameter distribution profile and densities of balsam fir regeneration similar to those of pre-harvest conditions. Lower retention treatments (DL, CL, and CL + SCAR) tended to favor regeneration of pioneer, shade-intolerant species. Except for black spruce (for which mortality was highest in DL), stem mortality was similar among harvesting treatments. From an ecosystem management perspective, this study suggests that gap harvesting can maintain, in the short term, forest stand composition and structure similar to unharvested forests, and could be used where management objectives include the maintenance of late successional forest conditions.
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".