MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2970082358 · doi:10.3390/fire2030048

Fire Exclusion Destroys Habitats for At-Risk Species in a British Columbia Protected Area

2019· article· en· W2970082358 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Kira M. Hoffman, Sara Wickham, W McInnes, Brian M. Starzomski

Bibliographic record

VenueFire · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsTula FoundationUniversity of Victoria
FundersHakai Institute
KeywordsHabitatGeographyFire regimeForestryFire historyEcologyNational parkDendrochronologyThinningFire ecologyDouglas firEcosystemArchaeologyBiologyClimate change

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fire exclusion and suppression has altered the composition and structure of Garry oak and associated ecosystems in British Columbia. The absence of frequent low severity ground fires has been one of the main contributors to dense patches of non-native grasses, shrubs, and encroaching Douglas-fir trees in historical Garry oak dominated meadows. This case study uses remote sensing and dendrochronology to reconstruct the stand dynamics and long-term fire history of a Garry oak meadow situated within Helliwell Provincial Park located on Hornby Island, British Columbia. The Garry oak habitat in Helliwell Park has decreased by 50% since 1950 due to conifer encroachment. Lower densities and mortalities of Garry oak trees were associated with the presence of overstory Douglas-fir trees. To slow conifer encroachment into the remaining Garry oak meadows, we recommend that mechanical thinning of Douglas-fir be followed by a prescribed burning program. Reintroducing fire to Garry oak ecosystems can restore and maintain populations of plants, mammals, and insects that rely on these fire resilient habitats.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.157
Threshold uncertainty score0.317

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.180 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFireSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207