Soil deformation and its recovery in logging trails of drained boreal peatlands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Forestry-drained peatlands occupy approximately 15 million ha in boreal and temperate zones. In Finland, they represent almost one-fourth of the total forest area. They are subjected to the same harvesting operations as upland forests. Although the soil deformation caused by timber harvesting is well documented in upland forests, the knowledge on the soil disturbance induced by the harvesting machinery on peat soils is still lacking. To address this, we collected soil samples from six peatland sites that were thinned using a harvester–forwarder combination. Peat samples were taken from the trails formed by the machinery and outside the trails to a depth of 10 cm. To assess the recovery of soil properties after the disturbance, we sampled sites along a chronosequence with respect to time since harvesting. Soil deformation under the machinery appeared to increase the bulk density and field capacity of peat and decrease its total porosity; however, disturbed plots and control plots started to resemble each other in their soil properties within 15 years. The results imply that peat soil is sensitive to disturbance but has a high recovery potential.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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 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".