MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999381525 · doi:10.5558/tfc2019-026

Evaluating and modeling variation in site-level maximum carrying capacity of mixed-species forest stands in the Acadian Region of northeastern North America

2019· article· en· W2999381525 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Aaron R. Weiskittel, Christian Kuehne

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNature ConservancyU.S. Department of AgricultureU.S. Forest ServiceNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBasal areaAbiotic componentEnvironmental scienceForestryRange (aeronautics)Forest inventoryGeographyForest ecologyEcologyElevation (ballistics)Physical geographyEcosystemForest managementMathematicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Currently no universal approach exists to estimate regional site-level maximum carrying capacity in terms of stand densityindex (SDIMAX) of mixed species stands across contrasting forest ecosystems. Regional research efforts that account forinfluential stand-level variables and species traits are needed to reliably derive SDIMAXunder varying environmental conditions and stand characteristics. This study used regionally comprehensive forest inventory data from various permanentsampling efforts to evaluate the effects of contrasting biotic and abiotic stand- and site-level factors on SDIMAXof multiple-species, structurally heterogeneous stands of the climatically diverse Acadian Forest Region of North America. Specifically,we aimed to i) quantify the stand-level maximum size-density line for an array of forest stands found across the study area,irrespective of stand structure; ii) evaluate the relationship between this stand-specific estimate of SDIMAXand various other stand-level attributes; and, iii) develop a generalized SDIMAXprediction model using SDIMAXestimates from objective i) aswell as potential regional drivers of SDIMAXfrom objective ii). The most influential stand-level factors on SDIMAXwere proportion of total stand basal area in hardwood species, basal area weighted mean specific gravity, range in stem diameter, andspecies diversity. Direct climatic variables were not included in our SDIMAXprediction model due to the limited variationexplained, but relationships with elevation and a site quality index based on these climatic variables were. Overall, we con-clude that i) variation in SDIMAX appears to be mostly driven by the softwood to hardwood ratio of the mixed species,structurally complex stands evaluated in our study and ii) the general approach offers a viable framework for estimating sitemaximum carrying capacity at a regional-scale and effectively managing stand density accordingly.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.932
Threshold uncertainty score0.135

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations17
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicForest ecology and managementFrench-language works237,207