Decadal‐scale changes in suspended wood after riparian recruitment in managed stands in headwater streams of coastal British Columbia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Large wood (LW) affects several ecological and hydrogeomorphic processes in streams. The main source of LW is riparian trees falling inside channels. However, in confined valley floors, falling trees are more likely to be suspended above the channel. Eventually, these suspended trees will decompose and break to finally fall into the channel to better provide functions for streams. We evaluated changes in wood decay, length, diameter, and suspended status (suspended or non‐suspended) 17 years post‐harvest and nine years after the first sampling occurred in 2006 in 12 headwater streams of coastal British Columbia, Canada. We also evaluated whether changes differed among riparian management treatments (no‐harvest buffers of 10 and 30 m in width, thinning, and unharvested reference sites), and identified the factors affecting wood changes and suspended status. Wood pieces advanced in decay, became shorter, and 34% of them ( n = 108) changed status from suspended to non‐suspended. Non‐suspended wood pieces were more decayed and shorter than suspended wood. Suspended wood was longer, thicker, less decayed, and represented 46.5% ( n = 147) of the wood sampled in 2006. Our findings revealed limited influences of riparian management on many aspects of wood changes considered in this study. Changes in wood characteristics were more likely for pieces that were smaller in diameter, longer, and suspended closer to the water. The transition from suspended to non‐suspended LW can be a long‐term process that can increase wood residence time and reduce LW in‐stream functions particularly in confined stream valleys. The suspended stage is also an important mechanism underlying time lags in stream ecosystem responses to riparian tree fall. © 2020 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".