Effects of clear-cutting and wildfires on succession of ground beetle (Coleoptera: Carabidae) assemblages on the east slopes of the Rocky Mountains
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We studied how carabid beetle assemblages in lodgepole pine stands have responded after clear-cut harvest and wildfires on an actively managed landscape ~20 km south of Hinton, Alberta, Canada. The work builds on and expands a previous study (Niemela et al. 1993) conducted 23-24 years earlier in many of the same stands sampled in the current study. Carabid species assemblages are compared along a chronosequence of stands ranging in age from 12 to 53 years after clear-cutting. Recovery of carabid assemblages toward pre-harvest structure in regenerating stands, as reflected in the 2013-14 data, appears to have progressed more rapidly than in equivalently aged stands from the earlier study. In addition, carabid species assemblages differed significantly between clear-cut and burned stands of comparable age in 2013-14, with assemblages of burned stands being more similar to the pre-harvest structure than in clear-cut stands. Ground vegetation, mineral soil cover and basal area of trees and shrubs were significantly correlated with structure of carabid species assemblages in young and old regenerating stands, suggesting that environmental and plant successional gradients drive patterns in carabid assemblages. However, assemblage differences between older burned and clear-cut stands indicate that the type of disturbance influences long-term carabid recovery. Relationships between these findings and issues related to conservation of biodiversity and climate change are discussed.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".